The URL can be used to link to this page

SP 1994-026 Travertine (2006) - Environmental AssessmentIN. %Emig j I� Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment EA Number CA -660-06-28 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA NUMBER CA -660-06-28 DATE: 4/7/2006 TITLE/PROJECT TYPE: TRAVERTINE PROJECT, RIGHT-OF-WAY GRANT LA QUINTA, CA CASE FILE NUMBER: CACA-45667 BLM OFFICE: PALM SPRINGS -SOUTH COAST FIELD OFFICE 690 W. Garnet Avenue, P.O. Box 581260 North Palm Springs, CA 92258-1260 BOR OFFICE: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 400 Railroad Avenue Boulder City, NV 89006-2422 APPLICANT/PROPONENT: TRAVERTINE CORPORATION ( 74-770 Highway 111, Suite 201 Indian Wells, California 92210 Steven W. DeLateur, Esq., Agent for Travertine Corporation LOCATION OF PROPOSED ACTION: Jefferson Street: U.S. Bureau of Land Management; Section 32, Township 6 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian Madison Street: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation; Sections 33 and 34, Township 6 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian Avenue 62: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation a PROJECT ACREAGE: Jefferson Street: BLM = 3.64 acres Madison Street: BOR = 4.38 acres Avenue 6Z BOR = 0.55 acres TOTAL = 8.57 acres (BLM = 3.64 acres; BOR = 4.93 acres) USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP: Valerie and Martinez Mountain 7.5 -Minute Quadrangles 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 LAND USE PLAN CONFORMANCE AND OTHER REGULATORY COMPLIANCE.....................1 2.0 NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION.................................................................................1 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES........................................2 3.1 BACKGROUND. ...........................................................................................2 3.2 PROPOSED ACTION..........................................................................................6 3.2.1 Access Routes..........................................................................................6 MadisonStreet......................................................................................6 JeffersonStreet.....................................................................................7 Avenue62............................................................................................7 3.2.2 Land Development....................................................................................7 ResidentialLand Use..............................................................................9 CommercialLand Use............................................................................9 Resort Hotel & Tennis Facility..................................................................9 Recreational/Open Space........................................................................9 ConservationArea................................................................................10 3.2.3 Utilities/Infrastructure................................................................................10 ElectricPower......................................................................................10 Reservoirs..........................................................................................10 Groundwater Recharge Basins...............................................................11 On-site Drainage..................................................................................11 On-site Streets and Utilities....................................................................11 3.2.4 Other Permits and Authorizations...............................................................11 3.2.5 Plan of Services......................................................................................13 PoliceProtection..................................................................................13 FireProtection.....................................................................................13 DomesticWater...................................................................................13 Wastewater.........................................................................................14 SolidWaste........................................................................................14 Public School Services..........................................................................14 StreetMaintenance..............................................................................14 Stormwater Drainage............................................................................14 3.3 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE .... .... ................................ ....................... ,............... .--- 14 4.0 DECISION TO BE MADE...........................................................................................15 4.1 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT(BLM)...............................................................15 4.2 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (BOR) ............. 15 5.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS ..................... 16 5.1 ACCESS ALTERNATIVES.....................................................................................16 5.1.1 Alternative Access Route A........................................................................16 5.1.2 Alternative Access Route B ..... ................................................................... 16 5.2 LAND DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES..................................................................16 6.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT.................................................................................._..........17 6.1.1 Air Quality..............................................................................._................._.......17 Ozone.......................................................................................................... 18 Particulate Matter(PM10)..................................................................................18 6.1.2 Areas of Environmental Concern...........................................................................23 Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument....................................23 Santa Rosa Wilderness Area.............................................................._..............23 6.1.3 Cultural Resources.............................................................................................23 NaturalSetting................................................................................................24 CulturalSetting...............................................................................................24 Field Surveys — 1994 and 2001..........................................................................28 FieldSurveys 2004-2005................................................................ .................28 Findings and Determinations.............................................................................29 6.1.4 Native American Concerns...................................................................................30 6.1.5 Floodplains........................................................................................................30 6.1.6 Farmlands.........................................................................................................31 6.1.7 Energy.............................................................................................................31 6.1.8 Minerals...........................................................................................................31 6.1.9 Threatened and Endangered Species.....................................................................32 Peninsular Bighorn Sheep.................................................................................32 DesertTortoise...............................................................................................32 Triple -ribbed Milkvetch.....................................................................................32 6. 1.10 State Listed Sensitive Species.............................................................................35 6.1.11 Invasive, Non-native Species..............................................................................35 6.1.12 Wastes (Hazardous/Solid)..................................................................................36 6.1.13 Water Quality (Surface and Ground).....................................................................37 Groundwater..................................................................................................38 SurfaceWater................................................................................................38 6.1.14 Wetlands/Riparian Zones......................._.................._........................................39 6.1.15 Wild and Scenic Rivers......................................................................................39 6.1.16 Wilderness..............................................................................................,.......39 6.1.17 Environmental Justice.......................................................................................39 ExecutiveOrder 12898....................................................................................39 6.1.18 Health and Safety Risks to Children........................................_............................40 ExecutiveOrder 13045....................................................................................40 6.1.19 Visual Resource Management.............................................................................41 6.1.20 Land Use... ..................................................................................................... 42 ValidExisting Rights........................................................................................43 Existing Zoning Designations.............................................................................44 fy 7.1.2 Areas of Environmental Concern................................................................56 7.1.3 Cultural Resources ................................................. .............................56 7.1.4 Native American Concerns ................................................... ........ .....57 7.1.5 Floodplains.............................................................................................57 7.1.6 Farmlands.............................................................................................58 7.1.7 Energy..................................................................................................58 7.1.8 Minerals................................................................................................58 7.1.9 Threatened and Endangered Species.........................................................59 County of Riverside General Plan ........................................... ,............................ 45 7.1.10 State Listed Sensitive Species.................................................................60 6.1.21 Noise........................................................................... ...... .....................45 ( 6.1.22 Geology/Soils...................................................................................................46 7.1.13 Water Quality (Surface/Ground)...............................................................65 6.1.23 Recreation......................................................................................................46 7.1.14 Wetlands/Riparian Zones........................................................................67 6.1.24 Social and Economic Resources...................................................... .................... 47 fYear -Round Population.................................................................... • ..........47 t Seasonal Population ................. t Community Characteristics...............................................................................47 7.1.20 Land Use.............................................................................................69 fRevenue Sources...........................................................................................47 7.1.22 Geology/Soils.......................................................................................75 Employment...................................................................................................48 7.1.23 Recreation............................................................................................77 r. 6.1.25 Traffic and Circulation........................................................................................48 7.1.25 Traffic and Circulation.............................................................................78 JeffersonStreet..............................................................................................48 MadisonStreet....................................,...,............................... ...................48 IAvenue 62........................................................................... .......................49 TrafficVolumes............................................................ ......... ......................... 49 iTransit Service...............................................................................................49 Existing Relevant TSM Programs.......................................................................49 7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .................................. ............................................. 49 50 7.1 CRITICAL ELEMENTS .................................................. ......................... 7.1.1 Air Quality..............................................................................................50 7.1.2 Areas of Environmental Concern................................................................56 7.1.3 Cultural Resources ................................................. .............................56 7.1.4 Native American Concerns ................................................... ........ .....57 7.1.5 Floodplains.............................................................................................57 7.1.6 Farmlands.............................................................................................58 7.1.7 Energy..................................................................................................58 7.1.8 Minerals................................................................................................58 7.1.9 Threatened and Endangered Species.........................................................59 7.1.10 State Listed Sensitive Species.................................................................60 7.1.11 Invasive, Non -Native Species.............................................................,....63 7.1.12 Wastes (Hazardous/Solid).......................................................................64 7.1.13 Water Quality (Surface/Ground)...............................................................65 7.1.14 Wetlands/Riparian Zones........................................................................67 7.1.15 Wild and Scenic Rivers............................................................................67 7.1.16 Wilderness...........................................................................................67 7.1.17 Environmental Justice.............................................................................67 7.1.18 Health and Safety Risks to Children...........................................................68 7.1.19 Visual Resource Management.................................................................•68 7.1.20 Land Use.............................................................................................69 7.1.21 Noise...................................................................................................71 7.1.22 Geology/Soils.......................................................................................75 7.1.23 Recreation............................................................................................77 7.1.24 Social and Economic Resources...............................................................78 7.1.25 Traffic and Circulation.............................................................................78 7.2 MITIGATION MEASURES .................................................. .....................79 7.2.1 Air Quality..............................................................................................79 7.2.2 Cultural Resources..................................................................................81 7.2.3 Threatened and Endangered Species.. .......... ........................... 82 7.2.3.1 Conservation Measures...............................................................83 7.2.3.2 Mitigation Measures....................................................................87 7.2.4 State Listed Sensitive Species...................................................................89 7.2.5 Wastes (Hazardous/Solid).................................................. ............. .......... 89 7.2.6 Water Quality (Surface/Ground)..................................................................90 7.2.7 Visual Resource Management....................................................................91 7.2.8 Land Use............................................................................................... 9 7.2.9 Noise.................................................................................................. 92 7.2.10 Geology/Soils.......................................................................................93 7.2.11 Recreation................................................................................... , .........94 7.2.12 Traffic and Circulation.............................................................................94 7.3 RESIDUAL IMPACTS. .................................................................. - . -.. -....95 7.3.1 Air Quality.............................................................................,...............95 7.3.2 Threatened and Endangered Species..........................................................95 7.3.3 State Listed Sensitive Species...................................................................96 7.3.4 Water Quality (Surface/Ground)...................................................................96 7.3.5 Noise ..................... 7.3.6 Geology/Soils.........................................................................................96 7.3.7 Recreation..............................................................................................96 7.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS............................................................................96 7.4.1 Air Quality................................................................. .............96 7.4.2 Threatened and Endangered Species..........................................................96 7.4.3 State Listed Sensitive Species...................................................................97 7.4.4 Water Quality (Surface/Ground)..................................................................97 7.4.5 Visual Resource Management....................................................................97 7.4.6 Noise....................................................................................................98 7.4.7 Land Use...............................................................................................99 8.0 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT CONSIDERATIONS .....................................................100 9.0 PERSONS/AGENCIES CONSULTED................................................................................101 10.0 LITERATURE CITED ........................................................ ............................................103 IPA LIST OF FIGURES Figure1. Project Location................................................................................................3 Figure 2. Project Site Showing Adjacent Land Management...................................................4 Figure 3. Regional Map Showing Existing Special Area Designations in Vicinity of Travertine Property........................................................................................................27 Figure 4. Bighorn Sheep Records Near Travertine Property..................................................34 Figure 5. Potential Habitat for Triple -ribbed Milkvetch on Travertine Property ...........................61 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Proposed Phasing of the Travertine Development, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California........................................................................................................8 Table 2. List of Permits and Authorizations for the Travertine Project.....................................12 Table 3. Travertine Development Zoning Designations.......................................................45 Table 4. Construction Emission Summary by Development Phase for the Madison Street Project..........................................................................................................51 Table 5. Significance of Construction -Related Impacts (Travertine Specific Plan).....................54 Table 6. General Plan Buildout Carbon Monoxide Concentrations.........................................55 Table 7. Most Invasive Wildland Pest Plants, California Invasive Plant Council ........................ 64 Table 8. Existing Exterior Noise Exposure Adjacent to Nearby Roadways................................72 Table 9. Year 2006 Project -Related Increase In Motor Vehicle Noise (250 Units Travertine and AmbientNoise)...............................................................................................74 Table 10. General Plan Buildout Exterior Noise Exposure Adjacent to Nearby Roadways ............ 98 Table 11. Design Noise Levels Adjacent to Master Planned Roadways....................................99 v C, 1.0 LAND USE PLAN CONFORMANCE AND OTHER REGULATORY COMPLIANCE �- The California Desert Conservation Area Plan (BLM 1980, as amended) is the planning document for public lands in the California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA). The CDCA Plan has undergone numerous minor amendments over the past 20 years, and is currently undergoing major amendments. For the purpose of the current major amendments, the CDCA Plan area has been divided into six eco-regions/planning areas, including the Coachella Valley planning area. The Coachella Valley CDCA Plan Amendment and Appendices (BLM 2002a,b) were prepared in compliance with the planning requirements established in Section 202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA; BLM's organic act), the planning t regulations at Title 43 Code of Federal Regulations Part 1610, and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The proposed action would permanently impact 3.67 acres of BLM lands designated under the 2002 Coachella Valley Plan Amendment as a wildlife habitat management area. These wildlife management areas are categorized into eight vegetation community types and conservation objectives were established based on the habitat needs for sensitive species which occupy each vegetation type. This project would be required to conform to the habitat conservation objectives established for the desert scrub community. According to the CDCA Plan, BLM will continue to issue land use authorizations (rights-of-way, permits, easements) on a case-by-case basis. Rights-of-way would be issued to promote the maximum utilization of existing right-of-way routes, including joint use whenever possible. In accordance with Title 43 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1610.5-3, the proposed action and alternatives are in conformance with the City of La Quinta's General Plan and with the Travertine Specific Plan and corresponding certified Travertine Environmental Impact Report (EIR), both of which were approved by the City of La Quinta in 1995 and re -certified in 1999. 2.0 NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION The Travertine project, a 941 -acre multi -use land development on private land in the Coachella Valley, California (Figure 1), is completely surrounded by federally managed lands. In order to provide legal access to the Travertine property, Travertine Corporation requires Right -of -Way (ROW) permits across federal lands at four locations. Proposed access routes will necessitate the acquisition of a ROW grants from Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and a ROW grant from Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). Specifically, Travertine is requesting a ROW from BOR for an extension of an existing north -south oriented arterial, Madison Street, across BOR -managed lands to allow primary access to the development. Travertine is also requesting a ROW grant from BLM for an extension of an existing north -south oriented arterial, Jefferson Street, across BLM-managed lands to allow the required secondary access to the development. Additionally, ROW authorizations are needed for an extension of Avenue 62 across BOR -managed lands to allow public access, utility maintenance vehicles, and emergency vehicle access to the development. The purpose of the proposed action is to allow Travertine to access approximately 941 acres of its privately owned land. The Madison and Jefferson Streets ROWs are required because, in order to develop the property as planned, legal ingress and egress are required and the Riverside County fire marshal requires two all-weather public access roads to and from the Travertine project for public safety purposes. The Avenue 62 ROW is designated as a public street in the City of La Quinta's General Plan. The need for such permits arises from the fact that the property is wholly surrounded by public lands managed by BLM and BOR and because steep terrain along the western, northern, and southern boundaries of the property acts as a physical barrier between the planned development and nearby developed portions of the City of La Quinta (Figure 2). 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 3.1 BACKGROUND To understand the context of the proposed action, it is important to recognize that the Travertine project site originated as a means to achieve the purpose and need for the Toro Canyon Land Exchange, which was proposed to BLM by The Nature Conservancy and George Berkey and Associates, Inc. in 1988-89. The purpose and need for the Toro Canyon Land Exchange was to dispose of BLM-managed public lands more suitable for land development (now the Travertine 2 Figure 1. Project Location nine 41t Its —A ti, Elf 71 IT - to -_J L op 6 111CiY TME agpF.". 1 14 4 . . . . . . . . 4 4 4 7d 7 RR m (NL Crin AAFR t'47 E—ft AA IL L U C A L I F 0 K 1`4 k A TRAVERTINE DEVELOPMENT I- _J twlrA MA r" 1CM a I r* MA. tulm ftXwOfw W4t**W_WWkM Figure i. Praled wstan. SWCA LIS 3 Maas Maa Qw Figure 2. Project Site Showing Adjacent Land Management ONMeM TRAVERTINE AMOS MID DEVELOPMENT ur a. l C--1, CA Fg" 2 Prcloct ifto Th -o g.—A 'Rk C r. lands), in exchange for acquiring private lands into the public lands ownership that provided important habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep. A brief summary of the Toro Canyon Land Exchange is provided below. Initially, the land exchange proponents, represented by Mr. Berkey, owned four separate ( sections of land within the Santa Rosa Mountains. The Nature Conservancy owned one section of land, which was within both the City of Palm Springs and the Santa Rosa Mountains Wildlife Habitat Area (SRMWHA). All five sections of land, which encompassed approximately 3,207 acres, were within the Santa Rosa Mountains National Scenic Area (SRMNSA). In exchange for these five sections of land ("offered lands") that were acquired by BLM, The Nature Conservancy and Mr. Berkey received one section of BLM land ("selected lands") comprising approximately 638.56 acres. After the exchange was completed, this selected parcel, in addition to approximately 270 privately owned adjoining acres, became the Travertine project site described in the currently proposed project. The Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared for the Toro Canyon Land Exchange concluded that, as a consequence of the exchange, these five sections of offered lands would now be protected as federal resources' and the Travertine project site would subsequently be developed in accordance with the land use planning designations imposed by the City of La Quinta. At the time of the land exchange, the Travertine project site was included within the Eastern Coachella Valley Community Plan (ECVCP) in Riverside County. The ECVCP land use designation for lower elevation, flatter portions of the Travertine selected parcel was "Planned Residential Reserve". This designation was intended to allow for large scale, self-contained resort communities. The steeper portions of the Travertine selected parcel were designated as "Mountainous Areas" in the ECVCP. Limited land uses are permitted in areas covered by this designation. They include Open Space, limited recreational uses, limited single family residential, landfills and resource development. Once the land exchange was approved, the City of La Quinta commenced annexation proceedings for the Travertine project site portion, and the site was incorporated into the City boundaries and zoned as Low Density Residential (LDR, 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) and Open Space (1 dwelling unit per acre). In 1995, a specific plan (Specific Plan 94-026) and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 94112047) were completed for the proposed Travertine development and approved by the City of La Quinta by adoption of Resolution 95-39. In 1999, a public hearing was held for a requested time extension and the City of La Quinta approved an indefinite time extension of the final specific plan by adoption of Resolution 99-061. The Exchange Alternative proposed that the five sections of land in the SRMNSA exchanged to BLM would be managed as habitat for bighorn sheep. In addition, the alternative stipulated that 160 acres of offered land (the Martinez Rock Slide located in the southern portion of the Travertine project site) be conveyed to The Nature Conservancy and managed as a buffer to provide access for Native Americans to Toro Canyon. Today. the Martinez Rock Slide is managed by BLM. 5 Thus, although the Toro Canyon Land Exchange EA evaluated impacts of the foreseeable land development uses of the selected lands (now included within the Travertine project area) and resulted in a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), this EA analyzes the specific impacts associated with the ROW authorizations from BLM and BOR that would enable development of the proposed Travertine project and considers the impacts associated with such development as well. In addition, much has changed since the issuance of the original FONSI, requiring an updated NEPA analysis. 3.2 PROPOSED ACTION The proposed action is the acquisition of three separate ROW permits from BLM and BOR that would enable Travertine to access the subject private lands for a planned development project. In compliance with local planning and public safety requirements, Travertine Corporation proposes to construct a primary access road (Madison Street) and a secondary access road (Jefferson Street) in order to reach these privately held lands, which would then be developed into residential, commercial, and recreational areas. A third access road, Avenue 62, is a designated public street in the City of La Quinta's General Plan. Upon construction of the primary and secondary access roads, Travertine Corporation would dedicate these roadways to the City of La Quinta, which would then be responsible for maintenance and future renewal of ROW permits with BLM and BOR. Each access route is described briefly below, followed by a detailed description of the planned land development. 3.2.1 Access Routes Madison Street. The Madison Street ROW, which is intended to provide primary access to the development site, would extend across BOR -managed lands and Dike No. 4 between Avenue 60 and Avenue 62 located along the section line between Sections 33 and 34 (Figure 2). The ROW would be approximately 2,600 feet long and 100 feet wide in which four paved lanes (two lanes in either direction) would be constructed. All construction staging would take place from nearby privately owned lands. Buried utilities planned within the access road easement would include water and sewer, electric distribution, and storm drains. Dry utilities (e.g., cable television, telephone, and gas lines) would also be buried within the ROW. Additional details, including a conceptual plan view, of the Madison Street project are provided by Stantec Consulting, Inc. (2005-2006) and briefly summarized below. The top of the roadway on Dike No. 4 would be 27 feet, slightly higher than the elevation of Dike No. 4. The top of the roadway from the Dike to its intersection with future Avenue 62 would be above the maximum 100 -year water surface elevation. Fill for the roadway would be provided by excavating borrow areas adjacent to the roadway alignment. Two drainage culverts would be constructed to convey 100 -year flows through the roadway embankment. lei Jefferson Street. The Jefferson Street ROW, which is intended to provide secondary access to the development site, would extend across BLM-managed lands located in the northeast corner of Section 32 (see Figure 2). The ROW would be approximately 1,600 feet long and 100 feet wide. The proposed road that would be constructed within the ROW would consist of four paved lanes (two lanes in either direction), without a median. Buried utilities planned within the road ROW would include water and sewer, electric distribution, and storm drains. Dry utilities (e.g., cable television, telephone, and gas lines) would also be buried in the ROW. All construction staging would take place from nearby privately owned lands. Avenue 62. BOR and Travertine Corporation are parties to a ROW agreement, which allows vehicular traffic across Levee No. 4 at the Avenue 62 alignment (Figure 2). The Riverside County Fire Department has indicated to Travertine Corporation that it may be necessary to use this access point for fire and other public safety vehicles. Avenue 62 is also designated as a public street in the City's General Plan for local traffic to and from the east. As in the other rights-of-way above, any utilities and infrastructure would be restricted in size to meet the needs only of Travertine. This proposed use would expand the current authorized use of the existing ROW. Therefore, Travertine Corporation requires BOR approval to expand the scope of the existing ROW permit. The existing loose gravel road would be improved to conform to the City's standards for public asphalted streets. 3.2.2 Land Development The proposed Travertine development is a master -planned resort community that would include a variety of land uses, including residential, recreational/open space, commercial, and resort hotel/conference center. At least three proposed residential types, including estate homes, resort homes, and villas, would be oriented around up to 36 holes of golf and a driving range. A neighborhood commercial site is proposed to provide local services. A resort hotel/conference center will include the opportunity for a tennis facility, which may provide additional recreational opportunities for both residents and visitors to the Travertine community. The project would be developed in multiple phases over a number of years. The anticipated project phases are depicted in Table 1. After construction of the golf course, phasing of project area development would be driven primarily by the construction of the two water reservoirs, each of which would serve a different portion of the development. At build -out, the project would result in impacts to approximately 826 acres, of which about 267 acres are in designated Critical Habitat. The total acreage of Travertine could increase as described above, in consultation with the Service. This information is from the Travertine Specific Plan and exhibits prepared by The Keith Companies (1995a, 1995b, 1999) and Travertine Corporation. 7 Table 1. Proposed Phasing of the Travertine Development, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. Phase Description 1 Selective grading of project site, and construction of Madison Street from Avenue 60 to Avenue 62. 2 Construction of lower contour water reservoir, water mains, sewer, & other backbone infrastructure. 3 Golf course development (driving range & first 18 holes around southern perimeter). 4 Phase 1 of residential development of approximately 500 units and construction of Jefferson Street. 5 Clubhouse construction. 6 Phase 2 of residential development of approximately 500 units. 7 Golf course development (second 18 holes). 8 Phase 3 of residential development of approximately 500 units. 9 Construction of upper water reservoir. 10 Phase 4 of residential development of approximately 500 units. 11 Construction of Resort Hotel & associated facilities. 12 Construction of Commercial Site & associated facilities. 13 Construction of Connector Trail & Trail User Parking Lot (to connect CVRPD, Madison Street, and Dike #4 Trail, with Boo Hoff Trail). W C, C, Residential Land Use: The project could include a total of up to 2,000 home sites, consisting of multiple residential land uses consistent with local concepts of Estate Homes, Resort Homes, f and Villas. This land use concept provides for a variety of residential housing and lot sizes. The combination of lot numbers, sizes, and residential acreage is the best projection available ( based on current market conditions. The actual combination at the time of development will be determined through the entitlement process with the City. Commercial Land Use: The neighborhood commercial site would be approximately 10 acres in size, although the exact size has not been determined at this time. The commercial site will provide local services such as a dry cleaner, a convenience store, and restaurants. Resort Hotel & Tennis Facility: The project includes an approximately 25 -acre, 500 -room resort hotel with associated visitor facilities, including tennis club and spa. (The exact number of rooms and the exact size of these facilities have not been determined at this time.) Recreational/Open Space: Encompassing about 298 acres, the desert -style golf facilities will consist of up to 36 holes and a driving range. Associated with the golf facility will be a single clubhouse and related uses, including a driving range and maintenance facilities that would encompass an additional 4 acres. The desert golf course design will maximize retention of native open space that will naturally merge into the adjoining desert scrub and woodland. A 100 -foot wide recreational trail corridor and the golf course will front the project: habitat edge, providing a minimum 200 -foot wide buffer between residential units and desert habitat proposed for conservation. These setback measures provide additional buffer between the development and bighorn sheep habitat. Together, natural and artificial open space uses, including golf course and intermixed desert open space, trail corridor, and conserved habitat for bighorn sheep, total approximately 413 acres. The trail corridor proposed along the golf course perimeter is intended to connect with other trail segments on adjoining properties that would link the Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District's (CVRPD) Dike #4 Trail with the Boo Hoff Trail. This altered alignment of the City's General Plan trail network was agreed to by Travertine, the City, BLM, BOR, and the Service. The Travertine connector trail, to be located along the Madison Street alignment south of Avenue 62, will provide public access for viewing of the Martinez Rockslide, a prominent geological feature adjacent to Travertine and is hereafter referred to as the Rockslide Access Trail. Unauthorized trails currently in use on Travertine's property will be closed to minimize impacts to bighorn sheep. The proposed Martinez Rockslide Access Trail begins on Dike #4 at Avenue 62 and proceeds south on the Madison Street alignment, as requested by the City to the development/habitat edge, where it then roughly follows the golf course alignment to the base of the Martinez Rockslide. The Trail then follows the base of the Rockslide until it veers in a northwesterly direction toward the junction of Sections 4, 5, 32 and 33, again following along or through the 17 golf course. The Trail would then parallel the section line between Section 32 and Section 33 on the west side of the proposed Jefferson Street (i.e., until it connects with the Boo Hoff Trail). Parking for trail users will be located on the project site at two locations: one at Madison Street and Avenue 62, and the other approximately 0.75 miles south of there near the southern terminus of the proposed Madison Street extension. Conservation Area: Travertine will establish a Conservation Area located in the southern portion of the property adjacent to the Martinez Rockslide. The Conservation Area boundaries were originally established on 1 May 2003 during a field visit between Travertine, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) (S. DeLateur, attorney for Travertine Corporation, personal communication to K. Kertell, SWCA, 20 January 2004). These boundaries were finalized through consultation with the Service on 7 December 2005. This Conservation Area would become part of the Habitat Reserve of the Coachella Valley Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), if and when the CVMSHCP is adopted. 3.2.3 Utilities/infrastructure All project infrastructures will be designed and constructed to serve only the Travertine project or lands east of Travertine. No additional capacity will be installed to provide service for potential projects in Section 5. Support facilities for the Travertine development would entail two gravity -distribution water reservoirs. Imperial Irrigation District Energy (IIDE) is the local electric power provider to the project. Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) is the local water and sewer services provider to the project site. Currently, domestic water service lines exist in the area of the intersection of Avenue 60 and Madison Street. Electric Power: IIDE plans to provide electric power to the Travertine project. Travertine anticipates that the electric power lines will be located within Madison Street and Jefferson Street, and possibly within Avenue 62. All distribution lines would be under -grounded. Section 5 landowners other than Travertine will be solely responsible for providing utilities, adequate utility system capacities, and any associated system upsizing for potential developments there. Please refer to the Section 5 Addendum to the Travertine Biological Assessment for a detailed discussion of the impacts of the Travertine project on Section 5. Reservoirs: CVWD plans to provide the Travertine project with water by dividing Travertine into two pressure zones, each of which will be served by a separate reservoir. CVWD has determined that the only locations suitable for the two proposed water reservoirs are in Section 5, with one placed at the 332 -foot elevation and the other at the 405 -foot elevation. Both reservoirs will be depressed and screened to the greatest extent possible. Any above -ground tank appurtenances will be painted with non -reflective paint colored to blend with the surrounding habitat. The post -construction footprint of the reservoirs and access road is expected to be about 6 acres and all areas temporarily disturbed during construction will be revegetated using locally endemic native plant species/materials. Access would be strictly limited to CVWD personnel and maintenance vehicles. An access road would be constructed with a typical all-weather, Class 2 road base of compacted gravel. An access gate will be ( constructed to prevent public use and proliferation of unauthorized trailheads. Electric power to the reservoirs will be under -grounded and no night -lighting will be used. Groundwater Recharge Basins. CVWD wishes to increase its groundwater recharge program in the vicinity of the project. Travertine, in coordination with CVWD's program, will cooperate with CVWD to facilitate the implementation of this recharge basin project. These basins could be the source of fill for the proposed Madison Street improvements. During storm events, the runoff from the upstream drainage area is expected to flow to the basins. Flows exceeding the capacity of the basins will be conveyed by the basin overflow spillways toward Dike No. 4. The basin spillways will function as a drainage system for conveyance of storm flows along the west side of the roadway. The proposed Madison Street improvements and borrow areas will be designed such that the storage capacity behind Dike No. 4 is maintained. CVWD will presumably construct its basins on a combination of BOR and privately acquired land in areas near the base of the Dike. On-site Drainage. A detailed on-site drainage plan has not yet been completed. Per the requirements of the City of La Quinta, existing, pre -development flows can be conveyed through the project and discharged off-site in an historic fashion; however, any incremental increase, as calculated for the 100 -year, 24-hour storm frequency, resulting from the construction of impervious surfaces (rooftops, streets, parking areas, etc.) associated with the project must be retained on-site. Stormwater on the Travertine property would be collected via storm drains and/or surface improvements and conveyed to localized retention basins, which would be developed in conjunction with the proposed project. The Q,00 flows will be retained in the above-described local retention basins. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan will be prepared and filed with the State Water Resources Board. On-site Streets and Utilities. A detailed on-site streets and utilities design study/plan has not yet been completed. All planned on-site streets and utilities will meet the design and safety standards of the City of La Quinta and utility companies, including Coachella Valley Water District. The applicant is prepared to dedicate 10 -foot wide public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. 3.2.4 Other Permits and Authorizations A list of other permits and authorizations required to implement the Travertine development is provided in Table 2. Included are permits currently required as well as those that are anticipated to be required during the construction of the project but this list is not intended to be an exhaustive and comprehensive one. Not included in the list are government actions that are administrative or ministerial in nature, such as recordation of documents. 11 Coachella Valley Water District (CVW D) Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD) Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) State of California State of California State of California State of California State of California State of California State of California U.S. Bureau of Land Management U.S. Bureau of Land Management Special Development Agreement for domestic water and sewer service; Well Metering and Recharge Agreement; approval of grading plans, hydrology studies, water network analysis and detention basins; review of groundwater and soil analyses; and approval of all other CVWD requirements Proof of Funding and Mitigation Agreement Approval and adoption of the Coachella Valley Multi -species Habitat Conservation Plan and issuance of Section 10 Incidental Take Permit California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG): Approval of Habitat Mitigation Plans for Peninsular Bighorn Sheep, Desert Tortoise, and Palm Springs Ground Squirrel; obtain a 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement, if applicable California Air Resources Board: All applicable permits Compliance with California Native Plant Protection Act California Water Resources Control Board: Submittal of Notice of Intent and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, 401 Water Quality certification if applicable Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): All permits and approvals with respect to the vineyard, if applicable; National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits or notices of intent, if applicable Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Adoption of Travertine's Water Availability Study: Proof of compliance with California Government Code, Section 66473.7 NHPA Section 106 compliance Right -of -Way grant (30 years) for the Jefferson Street Right -of -Way and approval of trail system through BLM-managed lands per the Travertine Specific Plan 12 Table 2. List of Permits and Authorizations for the Travertine Project. — - Entity Permit City of La Quinta Specific Plan (SP) City of La Quinta Environmental Impact Report (EIR) City of La Quinta Approval of Tentative Tract Map(s), Parcel Map(s) and Final Map(s) City of La Quinta Acceptance of Operation and Maintenance of Madison Street, Jefferson Street, and Avenue 62 City of La Quinta Issuance of grading permits. See Travertine Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist for other permits and required authorizations Riverside County Sheriff's Department: Proof of consultation to ensure that adequate law enforcement protection/prevention provisions are designed into the project Riverside County Fire Marshall: Proof of communication to ensure that adequate fire protection/prevention provisions are designed into the project and ( approval of all building plans Riverside County Approval of building permits to allow construction of IID substation { and related facilities and an equestrian center on the southeast corner of Travertine land under County jurisdiction Imperial Irrigation District Special Development Agreement for electric power from the Avenue 58 ( Energy (IIDE) substation via conduits within the Madison Street Right -of -Way and potentially from the Jefferson Street Right -of -Way. In addition, Travertine will provide an off-site location for an electric substation. Coachella Valley Water District (CVW D) Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD) Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) State of California State of California State of California State of California State of California State of California State of California U.S. Bureau of Land Management U.S. Bureau of Land Management Special Development Agreement for domestic water and sewer service; Well Metering and Recharge Agreement; approval of grading plans, hydrology studies, water network analysis and detention basins; review of groundwater and soil analyses; and approval of all other CVWD requirements Proof of Funding and Mitigation Agreement Approval and adoption of the Coachella Valley Multi -species Habitat Conservation Plan and issuance of Section 10 Incidental Take Permit California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG): Approval of Habitat Mitigation Plans for Peninsular Bighorn Sheep, Desert Tortoise, and Palm Springs Ground Squirrel; obtain a 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement, if applicable California Air Resources Board: All applicable permits Compliance with California Native Plant Protection Act California Water Resources Control Board: Submittal of Notice of Intent and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, 401 Water Quality certification if applicable Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): All permits and approvals with respect to the vineyard, if applicable; National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits or notices of intent, if applicable Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Adoption of Travertine's Water Availability Study: Proof of compliance with California Government Code, Section 66473.7 NHPA Section 106 compliance Right -of -Way grant (30 years) for the Jefferson Street Right -of -Way and approval of trail system through BLM-managed lands per the Travertine Specific Plan 12 Table 2, continued. List of Permits and Authorizations Needed to Develop the Travertine Project Entity Permit U.S. Bureau of Reclamation U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Torres -Martinez Tribal Council Sunline Transit Agency Utilities 3.2.5 Plan of Services Easement Agreement for Madison Street & Avenue 62 Rights -of -Way (public access) Section 404 Permit, if applicable Biological Opinion with at least a "not likely to adversely modify designated Critical Habitat" finding for endangered and threatened species based on reasonable mitigation measures, per Section 7 of ESA. Proof that development of the project will not disturb burial and other religious sites Coordinate regarding the appropriate placement of support facilities for the public transportation system Dry Utilities: Service agreements and reimbursement agreements for gas (Southern California Gas Company), telephone (General Telephone [now Verizon]), cable television, and internet access service Waste removal permits and agreements: Coordinate with local agencies regarding waste and trash removal arrangements Police Protection. The City of La Quinta contracts with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department for police services; the Travertine project would be included in this contract. The Sheriff's Station is located in the City of Indio, which is approximately seven miles from the Travertine property. The Department maintains a target emergency response time of five minutes. Fire Protection. The City of La Quinta contracts fire protection services with County Fire; the Travertine project would be included in this contract. The County Fire Department has two fire stations within the City of La Quinta. Domestic Water. Potable water to the proposed development would be provided by CVWD. Service would be provided via a 30 -inch water main located in Madison Street, currently under design by Stantec Consulting, Inc.,, formerly The Keith Companies, and review by CVWD. The 30 -inch water main will service the project and be used to fill the two water reservoirs. The water transmission lines, booster pumps, and reservoirs would be designed and built by Travertine Corporation. All residential service lines and appurtenances will be designed and built by the residential developer. Once all facilities are constructed and processed for approval by CVWD, then a bill of sale will be approved by CVWD, making the facilities the property of CVWD. 13 Wastewater. Wastewater collection and treatment would be provided by CVWD. Wastewater within the development would be sent for treatment to CVWD's existing Mid -Valley Reclamation Plant No. 4 located between Filmore and Pierce on Avenue 63. The wastewater currently receives secondary treatment only. Recycled water is currently not available from the treatment plant. Solid Waste. The City of La Quinta contracts with Waste Management of the Desert, a private hauler for recycling services; it is expected that the Travertine development would be included in this contract. Non -hazardous mixed municipal waste is currently disposed at the existing Edom Hill Sanitary Landfill on Edom Hill Road in Indio Hills. Public School Services. No public school facilities are included in the Travertine development plan. Because the target market for the development is older or retired adults, demand for public school services from the Travertine population, if any, is expected to be very low. Public school services for Travertine residents would be provided by the Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD). Street Maintenance. The City of La Quinta would assume responsibility for all public streets involved in the proposed development. Most of the streets within the subject area would be privately maintained because they would be within a gated community. The City would be responsible for full -street maintenance of Madison and Jefferson Streets, and half -street maintenance of Avenue 62. Stormwater Drainage. CVWD provides regional flood control and drainage services to this area. CVWD does not, however, regulate local drainage, which would be the responsibility of the City of La Quinta. As described above, stormwater on the Travertine property would be collected via storm drains and conveyed to on-site retention basins, which would be developed in conjunction with the proposed golf course. CVWD would review all hydrology and hydraulic studies to ensure the impoundment capacity of Dike No. 4 was not impacted as a result of the proposed project. 3.3 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under this alternative, neither BLM nor BOR would issue grants for right-of-way across their respectively administered lands. Existing use of Federal lands proposed as access routes would continue as is and continue to be subject to applicable statutes, regulations, policy, and land use plans. As a result of this alternative, Travertine could not develop its private lands because it could not provide two points of ingress and egress (legal public access) to the property, as required by the 14 in conditions of approval of the Travertine Specific Plan approved by the City of La Quinta and by the fire safety requirements of the Riverside County Fire Marshal. 4.0 DECISION TO BE MADE There are two respective federal agency decisions pending this analysis; each is described below_ 4.1 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT (BLM) The decision to be made by BLM regarding the proposed action is whether to (1) issue a ROW grant through Section 32 to allow Travertine to access its private lands, or (2) deny the grant application. 4.2 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (BOR) The decision to be made by BOR regarding the proposed action is whether to (1) grant a right- of-way permit for extensions of Madison Street across Dike No. 4 for public access to the Travertine private lands and for Avenue 62 across Dike No. 4 to allow public access to and from the east, and for maintenance and secondary access for utilities and emergency vehicles, or (2) deny the ROW permit application. If access across federal lands is denied by either or both agencies, Travertine would be prevented from developing its private property. This is because the Travertine project site is wholly surrounded by federal lands and thus requires access across these lands. BLM and BOR, through their analytical and decision processes for the proposed access, consider, among other things, whether their respective decisions would result in significant adverse impacts to the following critical elements: • vital threatened and endangered species habitat or other vital wildlife habitat; • wetlands, riparian areas, and other water oriented lands; • unique natural or cultural resources; • public land management that meets specific administrative needs or benefits; and •. access to public lands, protection from fire or trespass, or prevention of damage to public resources. 15 5.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS Alternatives considered but eliminated from further analysis in this EA include (1) Access Alternatives and (2) Land Development Alternatives. 5.1 ACCESS ALTERNATIVES Two alternative access alignments to the project area were considered but eliminated from further analysis. The alternatives, Alternative Access Route A and Alternative Access Route B, are described below. 5.1.1 Alternative Access Route A This alternative would consist of extension of Avenue 60 west across BOR Dike No. 4 and across private and BOR -managed lands in Sections 33 and 34 to an extension of the existing Jefferson Street alignment and then southward to access the site (see Figure 2). This alternative would require additional BOR -granted ROW and would require tunneling through Coral Mountain. This would require extensive blasting and rock removal, which would likely have significant environmental impacts and be financially and technically prohibitive. Furthermore, this alternative would negatively impact lands that BOR and Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District have earmarked for a cultural center and ranger station. Therefore, this alternative was eliminated from further consideration. 5.1.2 Alternative Access Route B This alternative would consist of a southerly extension of the current alignment of Jefferson Street and modification of the ROW described in the proposed action to extend east of the proposed alignment across private land and a small stretch of BLM-managed lands located in the northeast corner of Section 32 (see Figure 2). Although this alternative would minimize the length of BLM-granted ROW necessary to accomplish site access, environmental degradation, engineering constraints, and potential safety risks associated with this alternative would be much greater than the Proposed Action as the route would pass between Coral Mountain and an adjacent foothill necessitating significant engineering and construction disturbance. Therefore, this alternative was eliminated from further consideration. 5.2 LAND DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES The original Travertine Specific Plan (1995) proposed a density of 2,300 residential units and 36 holes of golf (two 18 -hole golf courses) on the full 906 acres of privately owned land within the project area. This original proposal was approved by the City of La Quinta on June 6, 1995, 16 subject to the following condition of approval: that the Estate Homes planning area be switched with the golf course corridor located at the southern portion of the project site to provide an open space setback. These changes, which were included in the revised Specific Plan that was approved by the City of La Quinta in 1999, did not affect the overall density or number of residential units or golf holes. Following numerous meetings during 2003-2005 between Travertine, the Service, and CDFG, concerns were raised that the land development plan as proposed could potentially result in impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep, and that additional buffer areas around the project would reduce this potential impact. Consequently, the development plan was again extensively modified and reconfigured to limit or exclude development in the southern portion of the Travertine property nearest to areas considered to be potential sheep habitat. This effort resulted in a reduction of the housing density by 300 units downward to a maximum of 2,000 (at least 13 percent density reduction); reconfiguration of the golf holes; realignment of the recreational trail as bighorn sheep habitat buffers; and creation of a Conservation Area in which no development would occur (other than the siting of the water reservoirs). 6.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 6.1 AREA DESCRIPTION 6.1.1 Air Quality [On April 3, 2006, Katie Walters, planner of Stantec Consulting, Inc., reviewed the Air Quality portion of this EA. She determined that in the context of current air quality standards, the information set forth is accurate.] An in-depth analysis of air quality in the project area is provided on pages 3.4-1 to 3.4-6 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a), based on an air quality study prepared by Endo Engineering (1994) and included as Appendix C of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Technical Appendices (The Keith Companies 1995a). This analysis, which is incorporated by reference, indicates that the project site is located in an area that is in serious non -attainment for ozone (based on the state 1 -hour ozone standard) and particulate matter (based on the 24-hour and annual PM10 standards). Air quality information is summarized below. The Travertine project area and access roadways are located within the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD). The SEDAB is comprised of approximately 32,420 square miles located in the eastern portions of San Bernardino, Riverside, Kern, Los Angeles and San Diego Counties, as well as all of Imperial County. 17 The proposed project site is located in a desert region with a climate characterized by low f annual rainfall, low humidity, hot days and very cool nights. Wind direction and speed directly affect the ambient air quality. Prevailing wind direction at the Thermal Airport is predominantly from the north-northwest. The annual mean wind speed is 8.1 miles per hour; calm conditions occur only two percent of the time in the project vicinity. During periods of low inversions and low wind speeds, the photochemical smog formed in the Los Angeles/Orange County areas is transported downwind into the Coachella Valley. Peak oxidant levels occur in late afternoon and evening (between 4 PM and 8 PM), as pollutants are blown through the San Gorgonio Pass. Oxidant concentrations in the 50 -mile long by 20 -mile wide Coachella Valley decrease steadily as the air mass moves east from Banning to Palm Springs to Indio. Section 100 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that each State adopt a plan that provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the primary and secondary national air quality standards in the state. This requirement is met by the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) establishes a legal mandate to achieve health -based state air quality standards, and is generally more stringent than the federal CAA. Ozone. The project site is located within the Coachella -San Jacinto Planning Area, a subregion of the Southeast Desert Air Basin. Poor ozone air quality in this area is due primarily to the transport of both ozone and its precursor emissions from the upwind source region of the South Coast Air Basin. The Coachella -San Jacinto Planning Area is designated as a serious -17 federal non -attainment area for ozone. This designation indicates that the attainment date for the federal ozone standards is November 15, 2007 (17 years from the date of enactment of the federal Clean Air Act). The Coachella -San Jacinto Planning Area has 9 years from April 15, 2004, (i.e., April 15, 2013) in order to reach attainment of the new Clean Air Act standards (pers. comm. Steve DeLateur with Katie Walters, Stantec Consulting, Inc., April 5, 2006). Particulate Matter (PM10). The 2002 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (2002 CVSIP) is discussed in BLM (2002). Due to exceedance of the 24-hour and annual average PM,o standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classified the Coachella Valley as a serious PM10 non -attainment area on February 8, 1993. Under the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), areas that are classified as serious PM,o non -attainment are required to attain the PM,o standards by December 31, 2001. CAA Section 188(e) further states that the EPA is allowed to extend the attainment date for up to five years if attainment by 2001 is not practicable. After several years of demonstrating attainment for PM10 standards, the Coachella Valley was not in attainment by December 31, 2001, based on PM,o air quality data from 1999-2001. in The purpose of the 2002 CVSIP mentioned above is to develop an enhanced PM10 reduction program that demonstrates attainment with the PM,o standards by the earliest practicable date and to provide the necessary supporting documentation to formally request an extension of the PM,o attainment date. In the Coachella Valley, PM,o sources include construction activities, vehicular activity on paved and unpaved roads, and windblown emissions from disturbed surfaces. The highest concentrations are found in the summer, when hot dry weather produces more dust. Coachella Valley PM10 reduction efforts began in the early 1990s with adoption of dust control ordinances by local jurisdictions, development of a clean streets management program, and AQMD rules to reduce emissions from man-made PM10 sources. As a result, the Coachella Valley experienced three years (1993-1995) without a PM10 exceedance and the AQMD prepared and adopted the 1996 Coachella Valley PM,o Attainment Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan. As mentioned previously, however, the Coachella Valley exceeded the annual average standard of 50/mg/m3 during the years 1999 to 2001. In conjunction with CVAG, local jurisdictions, government agencies (including BLM), developers/builders, farmers, other stakeholders, and the public, AQMD staff prepared the 2002 CVSIP, which includes: • A summary of previous dust control plans and regulations; • Latest PM,o air quality; • Revised emissions inventory and emissions budget for transportation conformity; • The required most stringent measures (MSM) analysis; • Control strategy and attainment demonstration; • Natural Events Action Plan update; and • Official request for extension of the PM,o attainment deadline. The 2002 CVSIP control strategy is based on enhancements to the current federally approved dust control ordinances and AQMD rules. Control measures will incrementally improve dust control and compliance for construction and other earth moving projects, farming operations, paved and unpaved roadways, open vacant lands, and unpaved parking lots. New measures include increased construction signage, construction dust monitors, stricter track -out control measures, agricultural best management practices, ensuring limited access or control of vacant lands, stabilizing or paving of unpaved shoulders, medians, and unpaved roads, and additional control of unpaved parking lots. New test methods and requirements for notification and record keeping are also proposed. In 2003, the City of La Quinta signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)-establishing an ongoing, multi -jurisdictional relationship for the adoption, implementation, and enforcement of fugitive dust control measures in the Coachella Valley (AQMD 2003). The City of La Quinta, and other cities that comprise CVAG, have authority for controlling dust emissions from construction activities, disturbed vacant lands, unpaved roads and parking lots, and paved road dust. By prior agreement, these jurisdictions have lead responsibility for enforcing both local 19 t�- t ordinances and approved Fugitive Dust Control Plans. By signing the MOU, the City of La Quinta hereby agrees to the following: ( 1. Approved Dust Control Plans. A Dust Control Plan is a plan to control fugitive dust through the implementation of Coachella Valley Best Available Control Measures, such that fugitive dust emissions are in compliance with District Rule 403. 2. Approve Dust Control Plans for all qualifying activities or man-made conditions capable of generating fugitive dust emissions within their area of authority. 3. Follow the guidance provided in the most recently approved Coachella Valley Fugitive ' Dust Control Handbook (Handbook), and uniformly implement and enforce the Handbook provisions in the review and approval of Dust Control Plans. 4. After April 1, 2004 approve a Dust Control Plan only to an Operator who produces a signed "Certificate of Completion," issued by the District, demonstrating that the individual officially designated in the proposed Dust Control Plan as the person responsible for fugitive dust control at the site has completed the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Class. For purposed of this MOU, the term "Operator' includes any person, or his or her designee, that owns, leases, operates, controls, or supervises any potential fugitive dust generating operation that is subject to this MOU. 5. Require that the Operator submits two (2) copies of the approved Dust Control Plans, for those sites greater than or equal to ten (10) acres, to the District within ten (10) days from the date of approval for use by the District's compliance staff. 6. Issue an approved Dust Control Plan within a reasonable period of time. The City shall inspect each site to determine compliance with the approved Dust Control Plan at least every thirty (30) days from the start of the project. In addition, a dust control inspection shall be performed by the city within seven (7) days of receiving a notice of project initiation or a notice of project completion. ` 7. Require a bond, a cash Certificate of Deposit, or an equivalent form approved by the City, in an amount equal to at least two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) per acre for projects with more than 5,000 square feet of disturbed surfaces. Such funds shall be in an amount sufficient to completely stabilize all disturbed areas in the event that the Operator fails to adequately control dust, or abandons the site in lieu of mitigating fugitive dust problems; and shall be easily accessible to the City in order to initiate stabilization measures without a significant delay. 8. Immediately notify the District when a site is "red tagged" or shut down, or cited for non- compliance with a local ordinance or Plan condition. 9. Ensure that, when a site is "red tagged," all construction and earth -moving activity ceases and all efforts are directed to mitigating fugitive dust through the application of water or dust suppressants. 10. Provide the Operator with specific information regarding the steps that must be taken before a site will be "un -tagged." 20 11. Require conspicuously placed signs that identify a manned 24-hour phone number of reporting dust complaints to the Operator, based on the most recently approved Handbook guidelines. 12. Require an Environmental Observer, with the authority to enforce the Dust Control Plan, at all sites greater than or equal to fifty (50) acres. The Environmental Observer will have duties and responsibilities in accordance with the local dust control ordinance and the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook. Identification of an Environmental Observer shall be a prerequisite for approval of the Dust Control Plan. Failure of the Operator to continuously maintain an Environmental Observer at the site or available on- site within 30 minutes of initial contact shall constitute a violation of the Dust Control Plan. 13. Require all appropriate enforcement staff with duties and responsibilities relating to the enforcement of local dust control ordinances and approved Dust Control Plans to attend and complete the District's Coachella Valley FLIg`itive Dust Control Class. 14. Require that the staff person responding to a dust complaint have code enforcement status, or the authority to enforce a local ordinance or Plan. 15. Require staff who review and/or approve Dust Control Plans to attend and complete the District's Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Class. 16. Assign a city staff member with the single responsibility of determining compliance with local Dust Control Plans and ordinances at earth moving activities. If such an individual cannot be assigned, the jurisdiction will provide documentation to the District (i.e. policy guidance documents, certificates of staff attendance at the District's Coachella Valley Dust Control Class) demonstrating that the existing staff have bee trained and informed of the high priority regarding handling of fugitive dust issues, and ensuring that the fugitive dust program will receive comparable or better coverage than can be provided by a single dedicated individual. 17. Conduct random, unannounced inspections at construction sites. The purpose of the site inspection will be to determine compliance with an approved Dust Control Plan, determine compliance with the local ordinance, and ensure that the project supervisor has read and understands the Plan. 18. Develop and maintain record-keeping logs for each site that document all compliance actions taken by the City, including the implementation of corrective measures required Cto enforce an approved Dust Control Plan. These records shall be made available to District staff upon request. 19. Adopt by ordinance a penalty program for violators of Dust Control Plans or local ordinances where the initial violation will be established at a level that ensures ( progressive penalties for repeated violations. The penalty for three or more violations within one-year period shall be prosecuted at a minimum level consistent with a misdemeanor violation. The use of verbal warnings shall be discontinued. 20. Coordinate site inspections with the District so that both jurisdictions can evaluate instances of non-compliance with any ordinances, plans, or regulations. l 21 21. Provide the District with an inventory of public unpaved roads and unpaved parking lots within each of their jurisdictions within 90 days of the MOU's effective date. The inventory shall include: the location and average daily traffic estimates of unpaved roads; and location and size (in square feet) of unpaved parking lots. 22. Take measures (signage or speed control devices) to reduce vehicular speeds to 15 miles per hour on unpaved public roads with between 20 and 150 average daily trips within 60 days of submitting the unpaved road and unpaved parking lot inventories to the District. 23. Where a City owns a cumulative distance of six or less miles of public unpaved roads with each segment having 150 or more average daily trips, pave such roads or apply and maintain chemical dust suppressants in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications for a travel surface and the performance standards established in the city's respective dust control ordinance based on the following schedule: a. One-third of qualifying unpaved roads within one year of ordinance adoption; and b. Remainder of qualifying unpaved roads within three years of ordinance adoption. (Note: treatments in excess of annual requirements can apply to future years.) 24. Where a City owns a cumulative distance of more than six miles of public unpaved roads with each segment having 150 or more average daily trips, stabilize such roadways based on the following schedule: a. At least two miles paved or four miles stabilized with chemical dust suppressants in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications for a travel surface and the performance standards established in the local dust control ordinance within one year of the MOU's effective date; and b. At least two miles paved or four miles stabilized with chemical dust suppressants in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications for a travel surface and the performance standards established in the local dust control ordinance annually thereafter until all qualifying unpaved roads have been stabilized. (Note: treatments in excess of annual requirements can apply to future years). 25. Stabilize within six months of the MOU's effective date unpaved public parking lots with at least one of the following strategies: a. Pave; or b. Apply and maintain dust suppressants in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications for a travel surface and the performance standards established in their respective dust control ordinance; or c. Apply and maintain washed gravel in accordance with the performance standards established in their respective dust control ordinance. 26. Apply and maintain any temporary unpaved public parking lots (those that are used 24 days or less per year) with chemical dust suppressants, in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications for a travel surface and the performance standards established in their respective dust control ordinance prior to any 24-hour period when more than 40 vehicles enter and park. Temporary unpaved parking lots greater than PJIA C C 5,000 square feet will be stabilized in accordance with the disturbed vacant land requirements contained in the local dust control ordinance during non -parking periods. f 6.1.2 Areas of Environmental Concern Neither the proposed access routes nor the Travertine project area is within or adjacent to an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC). There are, however, a nearby Wilderness Area and a congressionally -designated National Monument near the project site (Figure 4). Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument. The Jefferson Street access route and project site are bordered to the south and west by the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument, which already interfaces with several Coachella Valley communities, including the City of La Quinta. This 272,000 -acre national monument on BLM and Forest Service managed land was created in 2000. A National Monument Management Plan was cooperatively developed by BLM and Forest Service by the fall of 2003 and approved in February 2004. The area is habitat for the endangered Peninsular bighorn sheep. Santa Rosa Wilderness Area. In the vicinity of the project site, the boundaries of the Santa Rosa Wilderness Area are essentially the same as those of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument. Santa Rosa Wilderness additions were designated in 1994 by the California Desert Protection Act (CDPA). Resource values include habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep, desert slender salamander, and many bat species. 6.1.3 Cultural Resources Authorities for managing cultural resources and programs of historic preservation exist under the National Environmental Policy Act, Executive Order 11593, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, the Historic Sites Act of 1935, the Antiquities Act, the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, Executive Order 13007 ("Sacred Sites"), and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA). Under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), the BLM is charged with managing public lands in a manner that will "protect the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and archaeological values." Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as implemented at 36 CFR Part 800, requires Federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. Executive Order 11593 (1979) instructed federal agencies to identify properties, determine if they were eligible for the National Register, and evaluate the potential effects from proposed undertakings. As a result of EO 11593, eligible properties were to be treated with the same respect as sites already listed on the National Register. The 2004 State Protocol Agreement between the California State Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the California and Nevada State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPO) defines the roles and relationships between the SHPO's offices and the BLM and provides BLM with an alternative procedure for Pal meeting its responsibilities under Section 106. The State protocol is intended to insure that the California BLM operates efficiently and effectively in accordance with the intent and requirements of the NHPA. The protocol streamlines the 106 process by not requiring case by case consultation with the SHPO on most individual undertakings. Natural Setting. The Travertine project area is located in the western margin of the Coachella Valley and the northern portion of the Salton Trough. The southern portion of the Coachella Valley, including the eastern extent of the project area, was at one time beneath the freshwaters of ancient Lake Cahuilla. That lake has a lengthy history of periods of filling and desiccation. It once filled the Salton Trough to an average elevation of about 40 feet above sea level, varying between 25-50 feet. At maximum, the lake was about 315 feet deep, 34 miles wide, and 115 miles long. The last high stand of the lake, which filled the basin to about 40 feet above sea level, dates from A.D. 1300 to A.D. 1580. There was also a brief inundation in the mid to late 1600s. The project area is bordered on the west by the Santa Rosa Mountains. Broad, sloping alluvial fans with sandy soils, interspersed by drainages, comprise the majority of the area, which ranges from sea level to 400 feet. The eastern portion of the project area edges the 40 -foot shoreline of former Lake Cahuilla. The rounded terminal end of the Martinez Mountain Rock Slide (MMRS), a 7 -mile long boulder slump of mountain slopes, abuts the southern portion of the project area. A number of natural rockshelters, some of which were occupied during prehistory, were created by this geologic feature. Cultural Setting. California's southeastern desert region has a long history of human occupation, with dates at the start of the early Holocene stretching back to circa 10,000 years B.P. (Moratto 1984:96-97; Schaefer 1994:62). This now -arid region includes the Colorado and Mojave Deserts, located east of the Sierra Nevada, Peninsular, and Transverse ranges. Prehistoric material culture in this region has been categorized according to periods or patterns that define technological, economic, social and ideological elements. Within these periods, archaeologists have defined patterns or complexes specific to prehistory within the desert region, including the current project area. A cultural sequence for the Colorado Desert has been recently summarized by Schaefer (1994) under three major periods: Paleoindian, Archaic, and Late Prehistoric. These periods date between ca. 10,000 — 6000 B.C., 6000 B.C. — A.D. 500 and A.D. 500 — Historic Contact, respectively. The introduction of pottery in this area separates the Archaic from the Late Prehistoric Period. The Archaic Period is divided here into Early and Late, dating between ca. 6000 — 2000 B.C. and 2000 B.C. — A.D. 500. In the Great Basin, the Archaic is also referred to as the Desert Culture (Jennings 1964; Warren 1967; Moratto 1984). Following numerous elements of earlier syntheses for California's desert region (e.g., Rogers 1929, 1939, 1966; Warren 1980, 1984), the cultural patterns within these broad periods are defined in this area as 24 the San Dieguito Complex, Pinto Period, Gypsum Period, and Patayan Period. The Patayan Period is further subdivided into three periods, Patayan 1—III (Rogers 1945; Waters 1982). The majority of the sites excavated in the Coachella Valley area date to the Late Prehistoric or Contact Periods. Research or excavation at archaeological sites along the old shoreline of Lake ( Cahuilla has been conducted in an attempt to study human adaptation to the former lake environment. These investigations have demonstrated that prior to European contact, indigenous Californians consumed shellfish, fish, aquatic birds, freshwater marsh plants, and animals and plants from both the lakeside lowlands and nearby mountains. They also traded for shells as far as the Pacific coast and Gulf of California. Around A.D. 950 during the cultural period known as Patayan ll, cultural traits characteristic of groups who lived further east along the Lower Colorado River spread into this area. These traits included the making of pottery and the introduction of horticulture. This period coincides with the infilling of Lake Cahuilla, as well as locally manufactured new ceramic types in the project area. The archaeological record, as well as ethnographic and ethnohistoric accounts, suggests people were living in the richer uplands rather than along the desertic Lake Cahuilla shoreline. They established temporary camps along the lakeshore to take advantage of the freshwater resources. The following Patayan ill period, between A.D. 1500 to European contact in the late 1700s, is marked by the recession of Lake Cahuilla, different pottery types, and the practice of small- scale agriculture. After the final desiccation of the lake, permanent villages were established on the valley floor. This period is also identified with occupation of the region by the Desert Cahuilla, the group of Native Americans who still inhabit this region. Ethnographic accounts indicate a major village, named Toro, was near the current project area. The project area lies within the eastern portion of Cahuilla territory, among the Desert Cahuilla group of the tribe. Wi'lyu'atam is the traditional term for the Cahuilla, referring to persons speaking the Cahuilla language and recognizing a commonly shared cultural heritage. It is thought that the Cahuilla migrated to southern California about 2,000 to 3,000 years ago, most likely from southern Sierra Nevada ranges of east -central California with other related socio- linguistic groups. The Cahuilla settled in a territory that extended west to east from the present- day City of Riverside to the central portion of the Salton Sea, and south to north from the San Jacinto Valley to the San Bernardino Mountains. While 60% of Cahuilla territory was located on the desert floor, 75% of their diet from plant resources was acquired in the foothills and mountains. Among the Cahuilla of the Coachella Valley desert, local territory belonging to a lineage was focused around springs in mountain canyons and the alluvial fans that spread from these canyons out onto the desert floor. Villages in these canyons were occupied year-round. They were situated to take maximum advantage of natural resources such as climate, water, food, pial and materials. The clans and families maintained associations among themselves for protection, for religious ceremonies, and help with large projects. C' By the time of European contact, the village of Mauulmii, located on the lakebed near the { project area, was supported by unique walk-in wells, as well as extensive mesquite groves. t" When a Mexican army expedition traveled nearby in January 1823, they reported "several rancherias [villages] between the mezquitales [mesquite forests] and the sierra [Santa Rosa t Mountains] in both directions, which we knew because of the great amount of smoke that went up, and the Indians who came out to look at us at several points." Blake's description of this ( same village in 1853 tells of the use of mesquite bean meal as an important local food, and noted how the villages were "...located in thick groves of mezquit [mesquite] trees .... We i camped at this place and were surrounded by crowds of Indians anxious to trade melons, ! squashes, corn, and barley, for pork, bacon, or other articles." Underground water supported the large stands of mesquite, the major plant resource for the local Native Americans. The water was sufficiently close to the surface that the Desert Cahuilla were able to excavate their unique walk-in wells, 12 to 15 feet deep with steps, and was used for irrigation of mesquite and domestic crops. At the same time, villagers also continued to practice seasonal scheduling and mobility, gathering resources at the higher elevations as they became available. The Desert Cahuilla used many of the plants observed within the project area, which are part of the Creosote Bush Scrub Plant Community that is characteristic of fans and valleys in deserts below 3,500 feet. Many plants were processed with milling implements and used for drinks, medicines, dyes and soaps, and to make baskets, thread, and nets. While they used hundreds of plants, the most important species included honey mesquite, screwbean, agave, pinon pine, fan palms, chia sage, creosote, prickly pear and cholla cactus, toloache, tobacco, and soaproot. In A.D. 1542, Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo and his crew became the first Europeans to explore California's coast. However, Europeans did not attempt inland exploration until the late 1700's when Gaspar de Portola and later Juan Bautista de Anza led overland expeditions through portions of California. It was not until the 1800's, though, that regular contact with California's southern desert cultures was established. By 1819, several outposts from the Spanish missions were established near Cahuilla territory at San Bernardino and San Jacinto, and the western Cahuilla began to have contact and interaction with Europeans. By the 1830's Mexican ranchos were located near Cahuilla territory along the upper Santa Ana and San Jacinto rivers, thus introduced the Cahuilla to ranching and agriculture (Bean 1972). Contact with the Spanish also introduced the Cahuilla to European diseases. By 1891, only 1,160 Cahuilla remained within what was left of their territory, down from an estimated aboriginal population of 6,000 to10,000 (Bean 1978:583-584). However, the Cahuilla have persisted within the desert area and today their population is divided among several modern reservations. 26 Figure 3. Regional Map Showing Existing Special Area Designations in Vicinity of Travertine Property 27 LU 27 Field Surveys — 1994 and 2001. In 1994, a cultural resources survey of the Travertine project area was conducted (The Keith Companies 1994). The 1994 survey, which included 797 acres, located a total of 26 archaeological sites and locations within or adjacent to the Travertine project area. Data recovery was completed at two rockshelter habitation sites with associated milling features and foot trails. The other 24 locations were considered of minor importance and were considered "non -unique" resources (The Keith Companies 1994). They included isolated bedrock milling stations, the remnants of isolated pot drops, a pot drop or sherd scatter cleared from a rockshelter, an isolated stone ring feature, and three broad camping zones along the old beach line of prehistoric Lake Cahuilla. The Keith Companies suggested that most of the archaeological materials at these beach camping locations had been removed by collectors, and that only very sparse pottery fragment scatters remained. They concluded that prehistoric peoples used this region extensively if not intensively. In 2001, a cultural resources survey was conducted of the Madison Street alignment, between Avenue 60 and Avenue 62 (Paul G. Chace & Associates 2001). No cultural resources were found within the corridor proposed for the Madison Street alignment, including the segment of the corridor through BOR property or BOR property immediately adjacent to the corridor. A review of previously filed records and landmark registries, a field reconnaissance, a review of local Native American views, and a review of the regional literature disclosed no archaeological sites or historical landmarks associated with the alignment. Field Surveys 2004-2005. Intensive pedestrian cultural resources inventory of the project area was performed by SWCA in February 2004, March 2005, and November 2005. In total, approximately 885 acres were surveyed, including 760 acres owned by Travertine and 125 acres within site CA-RIV-7394 administered by the BLM. A portion of Travertine land is planted with vineyards and was not surveyed. Except for the wash west of the Martinez Mountain Rock Slide (MMRS), the acreage was surveyed using 15 -meter spaced transects, running along east - west lines. Survey of the wash west of the MMRS was accomplished by walking along the natural contours of the slopes with personnel spaced 15 -meters apart, as terrain permitted. Within the Travertine Corporation property, a total of seven new prehistoric archaeological sites were identified during the survey. Four of the sites are grinding slicks on boulders at the base of the (MMRS), three are scatters of pottery sherds, and one is a rock cairn. The four sites at the base of the MMRS are near eight other prehistoric sites that border the MMRS, including three rockshelters. Eight isolated artifacts were also identified on the property. These are mostly single ceramic sherds, often found near the former Lake Cahuilla shoreline, but also include milling implements, a stone tool, and flakes from making stone tools. The boundaries of the previously identified prehistoric site, CA-RIV-7394, were explored and expanded as a result of this investigation. Additional concentrations of artifacts were recorded, with light scatterings of pottery sherds linking the concentrations. Cultural features within the site include bedrock milling features, groundstone fragments, possible prehistoric hearths, rock rings, lithic tools and debitage, pot drops, and a U-shaped rock alignment. The boundaries of the site roughly follow the contours of the high stand of ancient Lake Cahuilla. C Based on Cahuilla oral history, the southwestern portion of CA-RIV-7394 has been tentatively C identified with the Desert Cahuilla village of Mauulmi7. Loci within the southwest corner of the site contain a variety of features related to long-term settlement. In addition, three Native f American trails leading downward from the Santa Rosa Mountains meet within the site. This is apparently the same trail network that was used by the Cahuilla clan who came out of the mountains to settle the village of MauulmiT in the distant past. Findings and Determinations As a result of cultural resources inventories conducted by SWCA it has been determined that several of the sites recorded during the 1994 surveys are either not within the Travertine project area or are more properly included as loci within the expanded boundaries of CA-RIV-7394. Eighteen isolates and 11 prehistoric archaeological sites were determined to occur within the area of potential effect of the proposed project. The isolates consist primarily of single pottery sherds. Other isolates include lithic debitage. One cruciform rock feature was recorded as an isolate and is possibly of modern origin. The archaeological sites include bedrock milling features, rock shelters, trails, a possible camp area and a large Lake Cahuilla shoreline site. Of these 11 sites, three will be avoided through project redesign. The remaining eight sites have been determined to not be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Based on the data gathered on the Late Prehistoric site of CA-RIV-7394 by SWCA and others, the significant nature and broad extent of this site is evident. The site is related to Cahuilla use of shoreline resources of ancient Lake Cahuilla. Within the southwest corner of the site are loci that have been tentatively identified as a portion of the Late Prehistoric and Contact Period Desert Cahuilla village of MauulmiT. In addition, CA-RIV-7394 was apparently part of a settlement system with a large resource procurement network, as evidenced by the network of trails and related sites at the base of the Martinez Mountain Rock Slide CA-RIV-7394 has the potential to add to our knowledge of the Late Prehistoric period of cultural development in the Coachella Valley region. A network of trails likely connected these sites during the high stands of Lake Cahuilla during the Patayan II Period, as well as after the final desiccation of the lake during the subsequent Patayan III Period. The BLM has determined that CA-RIV-7394 is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and therefore qualifies as a historic Property. The project has been redesigned to avoid effects to this site. 29 As a result of project redesign, which includes the establishment of a conservation easement and development of a Reasonable Prudent Alternative, there will be no effects to historic properties as a result of the proposed project. Due to the density of cultural resources within and adjacent to the project area, and the potential ( for subsurface cultural deposits, a qualified archaeologist will be required on site during groundbreaking activities. 6.1.4 Native American Concerns The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was contacted to conduct a Sacred Lands File Search and to provide a list of Native American individuals and/or organizations that may have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. The NAHC search failed to indicate the presence of Native American Sacred Lands in the immediate vicinity of the project area. The project falls within the traditional use area of the Cahuilla Indians. The following tribes were contacted and provided with a description of the project and an overview of the results of the cultural resources inventory: Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians, Los Coyotes Band of Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Ramona Band of Mission Indians, Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Mission Indians, and Torres - Martinez Band of Desert Cahuilla. Requests from the Tribes include that Native American monitors be present during ground breaking activities and to be contacted in the case of inadvertent discovery of human remains. The Tribes' responses have either recommended that groups closer to the project be consulted or have deferred to Torres -Martinez as the Tribe most closely associated with the project area. The BLM and Travertine have been working closely with the Torres -Martinez Band of Desert Cahuilla and have initiated formal government to government consultation with the Tribe. Consultation with continue and will include development of an inadvertent discovery plan. 6.1.5 Floodplains The City of La Quinta presently utilizes a specific zoning district (Watercourse, Watershed, and Conservation Areas, W-1) to address flood prone areas. The intent of the zoning district is to identify areas where residency is inappropriate and only allow development in flood -prone areas based upon submittal of a drainage and stormwater control plan. The Madison Street ROW is the only portion of the project within the 100 -year floodplain. The other access routes, and the Travertine development area itself, are not located in a 100 -year 30 tom, f� Floodplain Drainage Area, according to the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). C 6.1.6 Farmlands The access roads and development area do not contain any farmlands designated as prime or unique by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, nor are they enrolled under the State of California's Williamson Act. 6.1.7 Energy 'f In 2001, President George W. Bush established the National Energy Policy Development Group ( (NEDPG). The NEDPG was directed to "develop a national energy policy designated to help ( the private sector, State and local governments, promote dependable, affordable, and l.• environmentally sound production and distribution of energy for the future." The outcome of the group's efforts was a report, The National Energy Policy, which "envisions a comprehensive long-term strategy that uses leading edge technology to produce an integrated energy, a environmental, and economic policy." Currently, there is no energy use on the access road ROWs or the project site. The proposed ROWs and development project are consistent with the National Energy Policy. 6.1.8 Minerals Mineral resources in the Coachella Valley consist mainly of construction aggregate (sand, gravel, and crushed stone), which is important in a variety of construction materials, including Portland cement concrete, asphaltic concrete, stucco, road base, railroad ballast, specialty sands, and fill. Important deposits of these materials occur within the Coachella Valley and are actively being developed (BLM 2002a). Other mineral deposits in the region include copper, limestone, specialty sands, and tungsten, all of which are limited to rocky outcroppings within the Little San Bernardino and Santa Rosa Mountains surrounding the Coachella Valley, and are not currently being mined. There currently are several active sand and gravel mines in the Coachella Valley, but none in the City of La Quinta and none within about 10 miles of the project area (BLM 2002a). Although no leasable minerals are currently being developed on BLM lands in the Coachella Valley, it should be noted that the Geology, Energy, and Mineral Element of the CDCA Plan, as amended, indicated that the Coachella Valley is prospectively valuable for oil and gas and geothermal resources, since the area has similar geologic conditions to other areas where these mineral resources have been extracted (BLM 2002a). 31 6.1.9 Threatened and Endangered Species i Travertine Corporation requested that BLM, as the lead federal agency, with BOR a cooperating C federal agency, enter into formal consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), C pursuant to Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), because the Travertine C development, as proposed, could potentially result in adverse modification of approximately 267 ( acres of designated Critical Habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis cremnobates). A Biological Assessment (BA) was prepared as part of ESA consultation and to establish a foundation to support the requested Section 7 consultation for impacts to Peninsular { bighorn sheep Critical Habitat (SWCA 2004). The potential for the project to impact desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii), Mojave population, and triple -ribbed milkvetch (Astragalus tricarinatus) was also evaluated in the BA. The Service and CDFG analyzed the potential for { the need for surveys for all other listed and sensitive species, and concluded that additional surveys were only needed for the foregoing species. An addendum to the BA, the Section 5 ( Addendum, was also prepared in order to provide information regarding recent mitigation/open space land acquisitions made by Travertine adjacent to their development project area. The Service issued a final biological opinion (#FWS-ERIV 2735.3) for the proposed Travertine project on December 7, 2005. Peninsular Bighorn Sheep. The southern portion of the project area (approximately 267 acres) is within designated Critical Habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep, and Peninsular bighorn sheep are known to occur in the Santa Rosa Mountains near the proposed project area (see Figure 5). The northern and southern portions of the project area are located within "essential habitat" for Peninsular bighorn sheep; according to the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep Recovery Plan. The Recovery Plan further indicates that the project area is in Recovery Region 3 (Santa Rosa Mountains—South of Highway 74 through Martinez Canyon), one of nine recovery regions established for Peninsular bighorn sheep. Desert Tortoise. The Travertine property is in an area of historically low desert tortoise densities. It is not within a Desert Wildlife Management Area or designated Critical Habitat for desert tortoise. To evaluate the quality of potential tortoise habitat on the property, a desert tortoise survey of the property and zone -of -influence, including proposed access roads, was conducted in September 2003 by Ecological Ventures California, Inc. (Ecological Ventures 2003). No evidence of tortoise occupation (live desert tortoise or diagnostic sign) was observed in the 700 -acre survey area during the 2003 survey. Two collapsed burrows reported on the Travertine property in 1994 by Thomas Olsen Associates, Inc. may or may not have been utilized by desert tortoise. l_ Triple -ribbed Milkvetch. According to Mr. Andrew Sanders, University of California Riverside l_ Herbarium, the upper reaches of three arroyos in the southern portion of the property appear to have a "low" or "very low" probability of supporting populations of triple -ribbed milkvetch, based on his review of recent aerial photography. None of the proposed access roads is included l 32 within these "low" or "very low" probability areas. Mr. Sanders, an expert on this species, considers the potential for this species to occur elsewhere on the property as being "vanishingly" small. The only record of this species from the Santa Rosa Mountains is of a single specimen found in Martinez Canyon, about 3-4 miles from the project area, in 1985. 33 Figure 4. Bighorn Sheep Records Near Travertine Property r Fol ISWC.A r:e euza.+Kf,a :G� is iaara II]G:F. — 'tiaA'+TH�Fii P"ILCT Imhosirr f - DEVELOPMENT 93HlWTu W EI -"&-. 4W w b.Uwj ASTOWA:I S WGS (k w buN� S Fol ISWC.A r:e euza.+Kf,a :G� is iaara II]G:F. — 'tiaA'+TH�Fii P"ILCT Imhosirr TRAVFRTINE SI674Th.5W8- iF&RbWffm), DEVELOPMENT 93HlWTu W EI -"&-. 4W w b.Uwj ASTOWA:I S WGS (k w buN� S "nWri-* cam*t, CA �.. 2-•NLE FAST FXFFER CfSIC�#A Ii �R[[l Ai RWMFA7 Fivirt4- Big vpm 0mvp nxx4m omw Ta rdrja }+rbpedy'. E5 ]IT1r1IfmrAl a 30m DOW Feet a� lush � as�ruura3ary �u 'ICU, 0 6.1.10 State Listed Sensitive Species State listed sensitive species, as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), also occur in the project area. An in-depth analysis of vegetation and wildlife (including state listed species) in the project area is provided on pages 3.8-1 to 3.8-12 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). This analysis, which is incorporated by reference, was based partly on information contained in a Biological Assessment of the project site prepared in 1994 (Thomas Olsen Associates, Inc. 1994). Four sensitive wildlife species meeting CEQA criteria have been observed in the project area: Palm Springs (round -tailed) ground squirrel (Spermophilus tereticaudus var. chlorus), prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), black -tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura), and loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus). In 1994, Thomas Olsen Associates, Inc. estimated that the Palm Springs ground squirrel, a CDFG Species of Special Concern, occupied about 70 to 80 acres of the project area. The occupied area extended along the eastern boundary of the project area between Avenue 64 and Avenue 62, and possibly included portions of the Avenue 62 ROW (Thomas Olsen Associates 1994). The occupied area also extends east outside of the project area to near Dike No. 4. 6.1.11 Invasive, Non-native Species Because of its diverse topography and climate, California supports some 5,000 different species of plants, including about 1,000 non-native plant species. About 100 of these non -natives are considered pest plants. These pests, or "invasive plants", have spread into California's wildlands, creating problems including: • Increasing the intensity, frequency, and size of wildfires, • Altering soil chemistry and nutrient levels, • Lowering water tables, • Altering rates of sedimentation and erosion, • Displacing or out -competing native plant species, • Degrading or eliminating habitat for native animals and organisms, and • Providing habitat for undesirable non-native animals and organisms. An invasive plant is a weed that has become established in natural or wildland areas. Invasive plants vary widely in their ability to occupy native habitats. Some are true invaders and will readily move into any suitable ecosystem while others are more colonizing; they are capable of growing in areas that have been disturbed by human or natural causes, but do not succeed in areas currently inhabited by natives. 35 I" 1 Invasive plants can rapidly degrade the quality of wildlands by altering natural processes and �\ reducing native biodiversity. The most common impact is a change in the biological structure. r Changes in plant communities generally drive changes in the populations of animal inhabitants. C Because native insects seldom feed on non-native pest plants, insect numbers usually diminish. C As a result, native bird and reptile populations tend to decline. Invasive plants may be inedible or undesirable to small and large native herbivores. Birds may not be able to build nests in the C' non-native plants for structural reasons. Invasive plants can also change the physical environment. In riparian zones, dense stands of invasive species such as arundo (Arundo donax) and saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) can clog channels and increase the severity of flooding. Invasives may not root as well as natives, resulting in increased erosion potential along stream embankments. Invasive plants can also cause wildfires of increased frequency, intensity, and size. Non-native annual grasses such as Mediterranean grass (Schismus barbatus) and red brome (Bromus madritensis) have become increasingly dominant in the Mojave Desert, creating carpets of dry fuel that carry fire rapidly across the landscape. The exotic grasses return in higher densities after a fire, increasing susceptibility to future fires. Invasive plants can also alter nutrient relationships within an ecosystem, which may impact other life in the habitat. Arundo has invaded streamsides throughout southern California. Because Arundo does not shade the water as well as native willows and cottonwoods, stream temperatures may rise. This results in increased algae growth and stream acidity. Native fish and amphibian reproduction may ultimately suffer. Other exotic plants take up salts from deep in the soil and deposit them on the soil surface, inhibiting the growth of natives that are less salt tolerant. No field survey of the Travertine property or of the proposed ROWs was conducted for invasive species. However, to the degree that the entire region supports several non -natives, including species such as Tamarix, red brome, etc., there is the potential for introduction or spread of invasive plant species onto the property or into adjacent or nearby natural lands, primarily as a result of introduction by construction equipment or residential/visitor vehicles or importation by residents of the development. 6.1.12 Wastes (Hazardous/Solid) Hazardous material is defined as any substance, pollutant, or contaminant that is listed as („ hazardous under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., and its regulations. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the Travertine project area was prepared in 1998 (SFC Consultants 1998). The Phase I ESA was performed in general conformance with 36 t, ' the scope and limitations of American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) Practice E 1527-97. Pertinent excerpts from the report, which was based on visual site reconnaissance, historical research, agency review, and professional opinion, are provided below. At the time of SFC's (- site visit, the boundaries of the property were not staked. Consequently, property limits east of (' the vineyard were inferred based on the existing dirt roads. Off-site contamination was observed east of the property. Since the regional drainage in this area is generally toward the northeast, the migration of off-site contaminants would likely flow to the northeast and remain off-site. In addition, contamination migration typically requires groundwater as a migration vehicle. Since the depth to groundwater in this area is at least 200 feet below the ground f surface, and this area of the Coachella Valley has extensive subsurface clay layers, CVWD has indicated that surface contamination is not likely to migrate downward to the groundwater table. ! The results of the ESA are summarized below. • "Environmental concerns may be present in the form of residual effects in the soil from insecticide, pesticide, and fertilizer use. These environmental concerns are typical for an agricultural area such as this. The groundwater analysis conducted by CVWD indicates many subsurface clay layers between the pumping aquifer and the surface. Due to these clay layers and the relatively deep groundwater level, CVWD indicated that the migration of contaminants from the surface to the groundwater below is unlikely." • "Recognized environmental conditions were associated with: limited soil staining from hydraulic fluids associated with the three groundwater wells; soil staining associated with the three fertilizer tanks; soil staining from the on-site dumping of debris and empty chemical containers; likely staining from inoperable vehicles on the site; possible impacts from the small vehicle battery observed on the ground in the mobile home complex; and leakage from the pole mounted transformers." • "Unrecognized environmental conditions may exist in connection with the 55 -gallon drums, 5 -gallon buckets and trash associated with the mobile home complex. Unrecognized environmental conditions may exist at the former AST location in the mobile home complex." • "Off-site contamination, as described in this report, was observed to the east of the property. However, since the regional drainage in this area is generally toward the northeast, the migration of off-site contaminants would likely flow to the northeast and remain off-site." 6.1.13 Water Quality (Surface and Ground) An in-depth analysis of water quality, both ground and surface, in the project area is provided on pages 3.5-1 to 3.5-13 and pages 3.7-1 to 3.7-7, respectively, of the Travertine and Green 37 r C, Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). This information is incorporated by reference and summarized below. Groundwater. The City of La Quinta is located above the Coachella Valley groundwater basin, which is divided into upper and lower valley aquifers. The lower valley aquifer is the only source of potable water to the City. As of 1995 (The Keith Companies 1995a), the lower valley aquifer was experiencing reduced water levels due to increased development in the area. Water quality within La Quinta is monitored by CVWD. Threats to groundwater quality in the area include a high nitrate concentration plume extending southeasterly from Cathedral City towards La Quinta. Additional threats to both the upper and lower aquifer include pesticides and fertilizers utilized for agricultural production, septic tanks, and new well construction. Surface Water. Floodwaters through the Travertine project area are expected due to the steep topography of the adjacent Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and south, the comparatively flat topography of the project area, and the potential for intense, short -duration rainfall events. However, soil erodibility, which is a measure of the susceptibility of the soil to erosion by water, is considered low. A preliminary jurisdictional delineation of waters of the United States in the project area was conducted in 2001 (Glenn Lukos Associates 2001). The purpose of the field delineation was to determine the limits of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and CDFG jurisdiction pursuant to Division 2, Chapter 6, Section 1600 of the Fish and Game Code. Approximately 65 acres of drainage features were identified within the proposed project boundaries, which contains three blue -line drainages (as depicted on the U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] topographic maps of Martinez Mountain, California and Valerie, California). These drainages exhibit characteristics typical of an Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) as well as a bed, bank, and channel. Access to the project would require crossing Dike No. 4. Dike No. 4 is part of a regional flood control levee system (West and East Dikes) that provides flood protection for the Coachella Valley from stormwater flows originating on the eastern slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains. Three natural drainage courses, Devil, Middle, and Toro Canyons, are tributary to Dike No. 4. Although Dike No. 4 is designed to provide flood protection during a Standard Project Flood (SPF) event, the City of La Quinta will only require that the proposed roadway improvements be protected up to and during the 100 -year storm event. CVWD, however, will require the following (Letter from T. Levy, CVWD, to S. DeLateur, attorney representing Travertine, dated 13 December 2001): (1) that Travertine demonstrate that the roadway improvement will not adversely impact the available storage volume behind Dike No. 4; (2) that Travertine design a large -diameter conduit under the crossing on the upstream side of the dike and parallel to the floodway to allow flows to equalize across the road crossing; and (3) that the access road along the top of the dike be gated on each side of the public access crossing. cid: �1 n In 2002, a hydrologic, hydraulic, and drainage concept study was performed for the proposed Madison Street Improvement Project across Dike No. 4 to address the above-mentioned f- requirements (Tettemer and Associates 2002). This study reached the following conclusions: • The proposed Madison Street Improvement Project will not impact the storage capacity of Dike No. 4; and b The roadway improvement will be protected during a 100 -year storm event. 6.1.14 Wetlands/Riparian Zones The delineation of potential jurisdictional waters of the United States conducted in 2001 included delineation of wetlands and riparian zones (Glenn Lukos Associates 2001). There is a potential for ACOE jurisdiction south of Avenue 62. No wetlands are associated with any of the drainages on the Travertine property; however, there are desert dry wash riparian areas. If there are areas of 404 jurisdiction on the project area, then the drainage features would also require Section 401 water quality certification by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The Travertine Specific Plan also requires that the project enter into a 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFG. 6.1.15 Wild and Scenic Rivers There are no designated wild and scenic rivers within or adjacent to the Travertine property or road ROWs. 6.1.16 Wilderness The federally designated Santa Rosa Wilderness Area borders the Jefferson Street access route and project site to the south and west (see Section 6.1.2 Areas of Environmental Concern and Fig. 4). 6.1.17 Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898. Environmental justice refers to the fair and equitable treatment of all individuals, regardless of race, ethnicity or income level, in the development and implementation of environmental laws and policies. In February 1994, the President of the United States signed EO 12898, "Federal Action to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low - Income Populations", which is one of the principal mechanisms used to implement environmental justice concepts at the federal level. The order requires federal agencies to identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority and low-income populations. Kue 0 The majority of residents in the Coachella Valley categorize themselves as "white", and other races represent a significantly smaller segment of the overall population. As a rule, minority populations in the Coachella Valley are generally well integrated and dispersed geographically, C and there are few isolated minority neighborhoods or districts in the region (BLM 2002a). An C estimated 70,000 acres of land in the Coachella Valley region consists of Native American reservation lands, including lands under the jurisdiction of the Torres -Martinez Indians immediately east of the Travertine project area. The Coachella Valley population is characterized by a diverse range of incomes (BLM 2002a). Residents include young working families, middle and upper class professionals, retirees on fixed incomes, those receiving public assistance, and seasonal workers employed in the region's agricultural and resort industries. The majority of persons living below the poverty level reside in the eastern (Coachella and Mecca) and northwesterly portions of the Coachella Valley. The Torres -Martinez Indian Reservation, which supported a population of 4,146 in 2000, occupies an area of 49 square miles east of the Travertine property. The median household income on the Reservation in 1999 was $21,993, with 38.6 percent of families below the poverty level. For comparison, median household income in the City of La Quinta was $54,552, and only 6.5 percent of the population was living below the poverty level. Almost 60 percent of the Reservation population in 2000 had less than a 9t" grade education, and only 1.4 percent had achieved a Bachelor's degree. Native Americans, like the Torres -Martinez Indians, represent an important local population that may utilize BLM land for recreational and other purposes. 6.1.18 Health and Safety Risks to Children Executive Order 13045. EO 13045, entitled "Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks", was signed by the President in April 1997. It requires all federal agencies to assure that their policies, programs, activities, and standards address disproportionate health risks to children that result from environmental health or safety risks. The EO defines environmental health and safety risks as those that are attributable to products or substances the child is likely to come into contact with or ingest, such as air, food, water, soil, and products children use or are exposed to. The Coachella Valley is nationally recognized as a winter haven for retirees and other seniors. However, much of the valley's year-round population includes younger families with children. Approximately 29 percent of the population of La Quinta, for example, is under age 18 (BLM 2002x). Although children are generally well distributed geographically throughout the Coachella Valley, much lower percentages reside in planned community developments such as Travertine, which target primarily older, retired individuals. 40 6.1.19 Visual Resource Management The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) requires BLM to protect the quality of scenic values on public lands (43 USC 1701). BLM has developed The Visual Resource Management (VRM) system. When a specific project is proposed, the degree of contrast between the proposed activity and the existing landscape is measured (Contrast Rating). The Contrast Rating process compares the proposed activity with existing conditions element -by -element (form, line, color, texture) and feature -by -feature (land/water, surface, vegetation, structures). The Contrast Rating is compared to the appropriate Management Class to determine if contrasts are acceptable. If the proposed project exceeds the allowable contrast, a BLM decision is made to (1) redesign, (2) abandon or reject, or (3) proceed, but with mitigation measures stipulated to reduce critical impacts. The VRM Management Class Objectives are defined as follows (BLM 2002a): Class 1: Natural ecological changes and very limited management activity are allowed. Any contrast created within the characteristic landscape must not attract attention. This classification is applied to wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, and other similar situations. Class 2: Changes in any of the basic elements caused by management activity should not be evident in the characteristic landscape. Contrasts are visible, but must not attract attention. Class 3: Changes to the basic elements caused by management activity may be evident, but should remain subordinate to existing landscape. Class 4: Any contrast may attract attention and be a dominant feature of the landscape in terms of scale, but it should repeat the form, line, color, and texture of the characteristic landscape. Class 5: This classification is applied to areas where natural character of the landscape has been disturbed to a point where rehabilitation is needed to bring it up to one of the four other classifications. An in-depth analysis of visual resources in the project area is provided on pages 3.9-1 to 3.9-12 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). This analysis is incorporated by reference and summarized below. The Travertine project area is located in the City of La Quinta on the southern edge of the Coachella Valley at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The southern boundary of the project site lies at the base of the Martinez Rock Slide. Vacant, private lands adjoin the site to the east and west. The project site itself is composed of broad alluvial fans typical of the western portions of the Coachella Valley. The gradient at the site is generally about 5 percent, sloping generally downward from the south and west. There are no significant on-site 511 r topographic features with the exception of some outcroppings on the northern end of the property. Existing light and glare onsite is minimal. r C VRM Class 2 borders the Travertine project area to the south (including Martinez Rock Slide) C and northwest. Included in this Class 2 area are the Jefferson Street and Avenue 64 ROWs. r Immediately southwest of the project area is Class 1 associated with the Santa Rosa C Wilderness Area. 6.1.20 Land Use In 1993, the Travertine project area was incorporated into the boundaries of the City of La Quinta. In June 1995, the City of La Quinta approved the Travertine Specific Plan, subject to the conditions of approval listed in the Travertine Specific Plan of Land Use (The Keith ( Companies 1999). The Specific Plan, upon adoption by the City of La Quinta, became the { zoning designation for the project site. The Travertine project area is bordered to the south by the Martinez Rock Slide, which is managed by BLM. The Martinez Rock Slide is a seven -mile long feature resulting from the natural shifting of surface material from Martinez Mountain (The Keith Companies 1995a). To the north, the project area is bordered by 60'h Avenue, the Coral Mountain development, and BOR land. Section 32 (BLM) and Section 5 border the project area to the west, and Madison Street and BOR Dike No. 4 roughly parallel the eastern boundary. Properties east of the levee are devoted to agriculture and the Shea Homes development. Lake Cahuilla County Park is approximately one mile north of the project site. The majority of the project area is comprised of broad, gently sloping alluvial fans that are typical of the western portion of the Coachella Valley (The Keith Companies 1995a). Within this area, rocky foothills transition into rocky plains and ephemeral desert washes. Guadalupe Creek, an ephemeral wash, bisects the property near the northwestern boundary. The western portion of the project area is characterized by medium-sized to large-sized boulders, intersected by smaller washes and desert pavement on small mesas. The boulder fields eventually give way in the eastern portion of the property to areas dominated by smaller rocks and open desert scrub. Existing project area structures and disturbances include a cultivated vineyard, groundwater wells, a mobile home compound, and dumping sites (SFC Consultants 1998). These are discussed in greater detail below. Existing roads on the property consist of dirt and gravel tracks in and around the vineyard. However, dirt roads also lead southward toward the Martinez Rock Slide. • Cultivated Vineyard. The cultivated vineyard, with staked grape vines, irrigation lines, and access roads, occupies most of the northern portion of the project area. Grapes E, 104 have been cultivated on the site since at least 1981. The vineyard is located entirely outside the boundaries of designated Critical Habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep. Groundwater Wells. Three groundwater wells are located along the southern boundary of the vineyard. Each well is fenced and has an associated generator (to run the pump), ( fertilizer tank, and utility pole with pole -mounted transformers. • Mobile Home Compound. A fenced mobile home is located in the southeast corner of the vineyard. ■ Dumping Sites. Dumping sites, consisting of inoperable farm equipment, containers, pallets, wood poles, cans and bottles, tires, etc., are associated primarily with the vineyard and mobile home compound. Valid Existing Rights. The only private lands, other than Travertine's, affected by the requested ROWs are summarized below. • Madison Street. Slope encroachments between Avenue 60 and Dike No. 4. Shea Homes owns the land on the east side of Madison Street. The Shea project manager has assured Travertine that the Shea land plan accommodates the slope encroachment and Shea is willing to grant Travertine an easement. Richard Hughes, the owner of the land north of Dike No. 4, south of Avenue 60, and west of Madison Street, has agreed to cooperate with Travertine as his project has been conditioned to build the full improvements along his Madison Street frontage. Richard Meyer and CVWD have also both indicated a willingness to provide easements for construction of their respective Madison Street frontages. In any event, Madison Street is an approved major arterial in the General Plan and City staff has previously told Travertine that the City would use its power of eminent domain (as it would for any major arterial) to permit the extension of Madison Street. • Avenue 62. The General Plan designates this street as a collector, which is 110 feet wide. Building even a two-lane road over Dike No. 4 at Avenue 62 would cause slope encroachments on both sides of that street. Shea has expressed limited cooperation, the full extent of which is still undetermined because Shea does not know how far they can go to accommodate Travertine without serious impact to its land plan. Howard Keck, the owner of the south side of Avenue 62, is expected to oppose an encroachment. The options for Travertine include building a retaining wall and requesting the County of Riverside to condemn the land for the south slope easement.' Keck may object to a retaining wall on aesthetic grounds. 1 Keck's property is in the County while Shea's is in the City of La Quinta. fL The Jefferson Street ROW will not involve encroachment onto any private lands except Travertine's. Existing Zoning Designations. The project site includes a variety of zoning designations according to the Travertine Specific Plan (see Table 3). 44 Table 3. Travertine Development Zoning Designations Zoning Designation Land Use RE -1 Very Low Density Residential RE -2 Very Low Density Residential RR -1 Medium Density Residential RR -2 Medium Density Residential RR -3 Medium Density Residential RR -4 Medium Density Residential RR -5 Medium Density Residential VR -1 Medium High Density Residential VR -2 Medium High Density Residential GC Golf Course MN Maintenance TC Tennis Club R/H Resort Hotel C Commercial County of Riverside General Plan. The majority of the Travertine project site is located in the City of La Quinta. However, approximately 60 acres in Section 3 are in unincorporated Riverside County. (Riverside County and subject cities are currently (early 2006) working to finalize a MOU whereby County Planning will follow the local City's development guidelines.) 6.1.21 Noise An in-depth analysis of noise in the project area is provided on pages 3.3-1 to 3.3-16 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a), based on a noise study prepared by Endo Engineering (1994) and included as Appendix C of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Technical Appendices (The Keith Companies 1995b). In 2001, an additional noise impact analysis was completed for the proposed Madison Street Extension (Giroux & Associates 2001). These noise analyses are incorporated by reference. A summary of these analyses is provided below. F The primary sources of noise in the project vicinity are traffic noises from the master planned roadways and construction noises related to the two major resort/residential developments, l Trilogy La Quinta and Coral Mountain, currently being developed within %2 mile of the northern border of Travertine. Trilogy La Quinta, which includes multiple phases, will contain over 1200 units at build -out. Coral Mountain, which is currently being graded, will include 800 units at build -out. l ►Rl The most common unit used to measure noise levels is the A -weighted decibel (dBA). The A - weighted frequency scale has been adjusted to correlate noise or sound to the hearing range of the human ear and ranges 1.0 dBA at the threshold of hearing to 140 dBA at the threshold of pain. A short-term noise measurement made in June 2001 at the base of the dike facing the residence recorded outdoor noise levels in the low 40- dBA range (Giroux & Associates 2001). The City of La Quinta has established noise standards by land use type as specified in the Environmental Hazards Element of the General Plan. Residential uses are acceptable in noise environments below 60 community noise equivalent levels (CNEL); commercial, employment and manufacturing in areas with a noise exposure below 75 CNEL; and golf and tennis uses are restricted to areas with a noise exposure below 70 CNEL. However, noise levels below 60 CNEL are desirable in outdoor living areas. 6.1.22 Geology/Soils An in-depth analysis of geology/soils in the Travertine project area is provided on pages 3.6-1 to 3.6-11 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). This analysis is incorporated by reference. A summary of this analysis is provided below. The Travertine project area, including access roads, is comprised of the Carsitas-Myoma- Carrizo soils association. Such soils consist of well -drained sands, gravels, and cobbles on alluvial fans and valley fill. The gently sloping fans within the project area extend from an elevation of about 400 feet above mean sea level (msl) at the southwestern boundary to about 50 feet above msl in the northwestern portion of the site. The fans drain generally to the east at a 5 percent slope into the valley basin. The southern boundary of the project site lies at the base of the Martinez Rock Slide, an approximately 7 -mile long geologic formation of slumped mountain slopes created by shifting material from the Martinez Mountain. 6.1.23 Recreation An in-depth analysis of recreation opportunities in the Travertine project area is provided on pages 3.11-1 to 3.11-7 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). This analysis, which is incorporated by reference, is summarized below. The project site is currently vacant and utilized as open space, with the exception of the cultivated vineyards. An equestrian trail corridor, the Boo Hoff Trail, traverses the southern portion of the project site. In the vicinity of the Travertine development area, existing park facilities include Lake Cahuilla County Park, The Fritz Burns Park, the Village Park, the mini - park in the Cove, and the Avenue 50 Sports Complex. 151N IF) n There currently is no authorized recreational use of those BLM and BOR lands for which the ROW applications have been filed. 6.1.24 Social and Economic Resources Year -Round Population. During the past 30 to 40 years, population growth in the Greater Coachella Valley has moved southeast from Palm Springs along the Highway 111 corridor toward La Quinta. When the City of La Quinta was incorporated in 1982, the permanent population was only 5,260 residents. In 20 years, the population has expanded by over 500 percent to 28,715 people. Since the mid-1990s, the City of La Quinta has been one of the fastest growing cities in California with annual growth rates nearing eight percent, and future population growth in La Quinta is expected to outpace growth in the United States, the State of California, Riverside County and the Coachella Valley. By 2010, the permanent population of La Quinta could reach 40,000 people, or nearly 10 percent of all Coachella Valley residents. Between 2003 and 2010, the City of La Quinta may gain over 1,400 new permanent residents annually through annexation, migration, and net natural increase. The median age of La Quinta's permanent residents was 36.4 years old in 2002, which is slightly younger than the Coachella Valley average of 37.6 years. Seasonal Population. Year-round residents are supplemented by a large seasonal (winter) increase in visitors. During the 2002 winter season, La Quinta's population grew by almost 12,000 people, or 42 percent of the year-round population. For the next five years, the size of La Quinta's seasonal population is expected to remain at 40 to 45 percent of the year-round population. Community Characteristics. Per the 2000 U. S. Census, La Quinta had the third highest median family income in the Coachella Valley at $56,848. Only Indian Wells and Rancho Mirage had higher median household incomes. Average household size in La Quinta is 2.80 persons versus 2.65 persons valley -wide (U.S. Census, 2000); 48 percent of La Quinta's population is under 34 years of age, and persons over the age of 65, historically the most recognized age group in the Valley, comprise only 13.5 percent of La Quinta's population. Revenue Sources. The City's primary revenue resources are transient occupancy and sales taxes; these revenues comprise 40 percent of City's General Fund revenue. Secondary resources are license/permit fees and property tax revenue. A majority of the City's property tax revenue, however, is allocated to the Redevelopment Agency. Approximately 88 percent of the land area within the City's corporate boundaries is in one of two redevelopment project areas. • Combined, these resources maintain existing and provide new services to La Quinta's residential and business communities. Resort and commercial development generates a majority of the municipal revenues received by the City. l 47 l Employment. Approximately 40 percent of La Quinta residents over age 18 are employed. Nearly all permanent La Quinta residents are employed in service -producing industries, which { - are led by resort and resident services, finance, insurance, real estate and retail trade. Employment seasonality is a concern for many residents of La Quinta and other parts of the Coachella Valley. The largest employers in La Quinta, which include CNL Hospitality Properties Inc. and "big box" retailers, reduce their workforces by approximately 30 percent during the summer months. Attracting companies that employ the area's diverse population on a year- round basis is a priority of the City and the Coachella Valley Economic Partnership. 6.1.25 Traffic and Circulation An in-depth analysis of traffic and circulation in the Travertine project area is provided on pages 3.2-1 to 3.2-6 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). This analysis, which is incorporated by reference, is summarized below. Regional access to the project area is currently available from Interstate 10 and State Highway 111. Though there is currently no improved access to the project site, local access by foot only is possible from Madison and Jefferson streets to the north and by truck on Avenue 62 to the east. s Jefferson Street. Jefferson Street runs north/south and provides two travel lanes in the project vicinity. North of Avenue 50, Jefferson Street is a two-lane divided facility with 44 ± feet of I pavement, a striped median, and a posted speed of 55 mph. Jefferson Street currently i. terminates west of Airport Boulevard. The La Quinta General Plan calls for Jefferson Street to continue from Avenue 58 south past Avenue 60 to the Travertine development. Madison Street. Madison Street is a north/south 2 -lane roadway with a posted speed of 55 mph. Currently, Madison Street is discontinuous between Avenue 54 and Avenue 52, Avenue 50 and SR 111, and SR 111 and Fred Waring Drive. The ROW width is 100 feet. Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights only exist along Madison Street where residential tracts or commercial developments exist. Between Avenue 54 and Airport Boulevard, Madison Street has been widened to provide two southbound lanes and one northbound lane with a raised, landscaped median and an eight -foot wide bike lane. Between Avenue 54 and Avenue 60, Madison Street has been improved to include two northbound and two southbound lanes. La Quinta's General Plan calls for Madison Street to continue from Avenue 60 to Avenue 62 as a 100 foot -wide arterial, as proposed by Travertine Corporation to BOR. After completion of the Madison Street improvements, La Quinta will assume responsibility for operation and maintenance of Madison Street across Dike No. 4. Avenue 62. This is an east/west two-lane undivided roadway with 26 ± feet of pavement. The speed limit is posted as 55 mph. Improvements such as curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights do not exist along Avenue 62. Traffic Volumes. Traffic volumes in 1994 in the Travertine project area are provided on page 3.2-3 and in Figures 3.2-1 and 3.2-2 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). Projected year 2000 daily traffic volumes are provided in Figures 3.2-9 to 3.2-11 and Figures 3.2-14 to 3.2-18. Transit Service. Public transportation in the City of La Quinta is provided by the Sunline Transit Agency. One line serves the northern and central portions of the City and provides connections to other routes at Westfield Shopping Town in Palm Desert. Service to the project site is currently unavailable. Existing Relevant TSM Programs. There are no Transportation System Management (TSM) plans in effect in the study area at present. The City of La Quinta does have a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 9.162) and SCAQMD Regulation XV has TSM/TDM elements that could be relevant to the Travertine Specific Plan, depending upon the number of employees that ultimately have jobs on-site. 7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES For the majority of critical elements addressed in this EA, an in-depth analysis of environmental impacts and lists of mitigation measures and conditions of approval are provided in the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a) and the Travertine Specific Plan of Land Use (The Keith Companies 1999). This information is incorporated by reference. Potential impacts and mitigation measures described since the preparation of these reports is also described in detail below. It is important to recognize that the 1995 Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report was completed prior to major changes in the proposed development, including removal of the Green Project, establishment of the Conservation Area, and significant down -sizing of the number of residential units at Travertine. Consequently, the 1995 Plan should be viewed as an upper level boundary study with respect to projected project -related impacts. Actual project -related impacts are expected to be much less severe that those described in these previous reports. 49 t� 7.1 CRITICAL ELEMENTS f-� 7.1.1 Air Quality Proposed Action Construction air emissions for the Madison Street project were calculated by Environmental Audit, Inc. (2001). An in-depth analysis of indirect impacts to air quality is provided on pages 3.4-7 to 3.4-14 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). These documents are incorporated by reference and summarized below. Direct Impacts. Construction activities associated with the Madison Street project would include emissions of CO, VOCs, NO,, So,,, and PM,o. Construction emissions are expected from the following equipment and activities: • Construction Equipment (dump trucks, backhoes, graders, etc.) • Equipment Delivery/On-Site Travel • Heavy Diesel Trucks • Construction Workers Commuting • Fugitive Dust Associated with Site Construction Activities et Fugitive Dust Associated with Travel on Unpaved and Paved Roads Construction emissions are summarized in Table 4 below. The highest construction emissions for most pollutants (except PM10) would be during the asphalt -concrete paving/street striping phase, which would result in the following: 27.0 lbs/day of CO, 4.3 lbs/day of VOCs, 55.7 lbs/day of NOx, 4.7 lbs/day of SOX, and 24.2 lbs/day of PM,o. PM,o emissions are expected to be highest during the cut/fill phase (100.6 lbs/day). A large portion of the total emissions is associated with on-site construction equipment and mobile sources (trucks and worker vehicles). 50 Table 4. Construction Emission Summary by Development Phase for the Madison Street Project Emission lbs/day Construction Phase CO VOC NO, SO,, PM10 Clearing/Grubbing Phase Construction Equipment 4.58 1.84 15.20 1.46 1.36 Construction Vehicles 12.95 0.46 4.46 0 0.14 Fugitive Dust - Mobile Sources 0 0 0 0 37.77 Fugitive Dust - Construction 0 0 0 0 30.80 TOTAL EMISSIONS 17.53 2.30 19.66 1.46 70.07 Cut -Fill Phase Construction Equipment 10.00 2.16 30.72 3.68 3.28 Construction Vehicles 12.95 0.46 4.46 0 0.14 Fugitive Dust - Mobile Sources 0 0 0 0 36.45 Fugitive Dust - Construction 0 0 0 0 60.75 TOTAL EMISSIONS 22.95 2.62 35.18 3.68 100.62 Road Construction Phase Construction Equipment 0.15 0.04 0.71 2.89 1.38 Construction Vehicles 2.20 0.12 0.26 0 0.01 Fugitive Dust - Mobile Sources 0 0 0 0 18.51 Fugitive Dust - Construction 0 0 0 0 61.60 TOTAL EMISSIONS 2.35 0.16 0.97 2.89 81.50 Curb and Median Construction Phase Construction Equipment 0.88 0.18 2.11 0.18 0.09 Construction Vehicles 5.32 0.30 0.25 0 0.01 Fugitive Dust - Mobile Sources 0 0 0 0 2.07 Fugitive Dust - Construction 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL EMISSIONS 6.20 0.48 2.36 0.18 2.17 Asphalt -Concrete Paving/Street Striping Phase Construction Equipment 19.90 3.93 55.39 4.66 3.56 Construction Vehicles 7.10 0.41 0.34 0 0.02 Fugitive Dust - Mobile Sources 0 0 0 0 20.58 Fugitive Dust - Construction 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL EMISSIONS 27.00 4.34 55.73 4.66 24.16 Trenching for Utilities Phase Construction Equipment 6.64 1.33 9.74 0.89 0.44 Construction Vehicles 11.26 0.40 4.25 0 0.14 Fugitive Dust - Mobile Sources 0 0 0 0 18.63 Fugitive Dust - Construction 0 0 0 0 1.00 TOTAL EMISSIONS 17.9 1.73 13.99 0.89 20.21 51 Indirect Impacts. Two types of air pollutant sources must be considered with respect to the proposed project: stationary sources and mobile sources. Stationary source considerations include on-site emissions from construction activities and natural gas combustion, as well as emissions at the various power plants, which generate the electrical requirements of the project. These power plants are located in California, Oregon and Washington. As IID generates some of its own power and purchases the remainder of the power, it is not possible to identify which plant will provide power for the proposed projects. Mobile source considerations include exhaust emissions resulting from short-term construction activities and long-term vehicular travel associated with the project. Short-term impacts on air quality will occur during the construction activities required to implement the proposed project. Short-term construction related impacts might include: Air pollutant emissions at the power plant serving the sites while temporary power lines are needed to operate construction equipment and provide lighting; • Exhaust emissions from the construction equipment used on-site as well as the vehicles used to transport the off-highway construction equipment required to and from the site; Exhaust emissions from the passenger vehicles of the construction workers; Particulate emissions (fugitive dust) from excavation, grading and clearing activities on- site; • Exhaust emissions from heavy trucks used to haul soil to or from the site if the earthwork on-site is not balanced; • Exhaust emissions from heavy vehicles used to transport building materials to the site; and Emissions from architectural coating and paving materials used on-site for buildings, roads, parking lots etc. Localized exhaust emissions will result from the use of construction equipment on-site. Exhaust emissions over a broader area will result from the transport of off-highway equipment and construction crews to and from the site. The daily analysis is speculative in that the specific construction schedule and details regarding which construction activities could occur concurrently on-site are not yet available. The quarterly emissions projections represent an l average of the construction -related emissions over a 3 -month period that includes emissions only on actual working days. Sources of construction activity that typically generate PM,o emissions include: grading, demolition (when applicable), heavy-duty equipment on paved and unpaved roads; and the loading and unloading of dirt onto trucks (when cut and fill quantities are not balanced on-site). l l 52 l Based on the SCAQMD graded surface factor of 26.4 pounds of PM10 per day per acre' (assuming 30 acres of the site per day in a disturbed state), construction of the project would C generate 792 pounds of PM10 per day or 25.74 tons of PM10 per quarter (assuming 64 working days per quarter). Therefore, surface grading PM10 emissions associated with the project will C exceed the SCAQMD significance threshold of 6.75 tons per quarter. The SCAQMD has established short-term construction -related and long-term operational thresholds that they recommend for use by lead agencies in making a determination of significance that considers both primary (or direct) impacts and secondary (or indirect) impacts. However, the final determination of whether or not a project is significant is within the purview of the lead agency. Since a project's quarterly emissions are determined by averaging over a 3 -month period (including only actual working days), it is possible to not exceed the quarterly thresholds while exceeding the daily thresholds shown in Table 5. As shown in Table 5, "worst case" daily and quarterly construction -related emissions associated with the proposed project could exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds for NOX and PM10.2 Table 5 indicates the SCAQMD threshold for CO, ROC, NO, SO, and PM10. Although long- term Travertine Specific Plan emissions may exceed these thresholds at build -out, the proposed Travertine project would generate an operational air pollutant emissions burden that is consistent with the existing General Plan designations on-site, which were the basis for the 1994 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). In addition, based on the lower housing densities currently proposed, it is unlikely that air quality impacts would be significant. Consequently, from a long-term perspective, the project -related impact on ambient air quality has been addressed in the regional air quality attainment strategies and in the mitigation measures described in Section 7.2.1, Air Quality. Since project -related operational emissions may exceed significance threshold criteria, mitigation strategies designed to improve the area jobs/housing balance and reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled have been incorporated in the Travertine Specific Plan to the maximum extent feasible to reduce the significance of project - related long-term impacts on CO, ROC and NO,, emissions. The proposed Travertine project achieves these air quality goals and objectives by providing employment opportunities as well as retail and recreational opportunities on-site to reduce the need for trips off-site. Projected 1 -hour and 8 -hour CO concentrations at the most heavily traveled intersection with a significant amount of project traffic (Madison Street @ Avenue 54) are identified and compared to the state 1 -hour and 8 -hour CO standards to determine the significance of project -related ' SCAQMD, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993, Table 8-9. 2 project has a significant impact if it interferes with the attainment of the state 1 -hour or 8 -hour carbon monoxide standards by either exceeding them or contributing to an existing or projected violation. 53 C' C C C f impacts. Significant impacts occur when CO standards exceedances are projected at sensitive receptor locations. In cases where the background concentrations already exceed the State CO standards, a significant impact is defined as occurring when there will be a measurable increase in CO levels associated with the project. A measurable increase is defined by the SCAQMD as 1.0 ppm for 1 -hour CO levels and 0.45 ppm for 8 -hour CO levels. Table 5. Significance of Construction -Related Impacts (Travertine Specific Plan) Pollutant CO ROC NOx Sox PMao DAILY SIGNIFICANCE Daily Emissions -Construction Exhaust 135.25 26.38 292.46 32.94 26.56 -Grades Surfacesb - - - - 792.00 Total (Lbs./Day) 135.28 26.38 292.46 32.94 818.56 Daily Threshold (Lbs/Day) 550 75 100 150 150 Threshold Exceeded No No Yes No Yes QUARTERLY SIGNIFICANCE Quarterly Emissions -Construction Exhaust 6.21 1.13 14.51 1.63 1.24 -Graded Surfaces - - - - 25.74 Total Emissions 24.75 2.50 2.50 6.75 6.75 (Tons -Quarter) Quarterly Threshold 24.75 2.50 2.50 6.75 6.75 (Tons/Quarter) Threshold Exceeded No No Yes No Yes a. SCAQMD, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993. b. Assumes that grading will occur on 65 working days/quarter. 54 The relevant carbon monoxide standards will not be exceeded as a result of this project, as demonstrated in Table 6, General Plan Buildout Carbon Monoxide Concentrations. Table 6. General Plan Buildout Carbon Monoxide Concentrationsa a. Includes the Travertine Specific Plan as well as La Quinta General Plan buildout. b. Receptor distances are measured from the roadway centerline. C. See the Appendix for details on how the background concentrations were derived. The purpose of an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) Consistency Finding is to determine whether or not a project is consistent with the assumptions and objectives of regional air quality management plans. Based on this determination, conclusions can be drawn regarding whether or not a specific project will interfere with the region's ability to comply with federal and state air quality standards. The Travertine Specific Plan would generate an operational air pollutant emissions burden that is consistent with the existing General Plan designations on-site. Since the City's existing General Plan is the basis for the AQMP emissions inventories, it appears that the project may be consistent with all of the key underlying assumptions associated with the AQMP. The Travertine project also appears to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the AQMP in that it provides jobs, retail uses, and recreational amenities that reduce the number of trips off- site and the trip lengths on-site. The mitigation measures described in Section 7.2.1, Air Quality, would minimize to the greatest extent feasible the potential air quality impacts attributable to a fully developed project. 55 1 -Hour Average (ppm) 8 -Hour Average (ppm) Receptor Distancesb 50 Ft. 100 Ft. 200 Ft. 50 Ft. 100 Ft. 200 Ft. Madison Street @ 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.2 -Avenue 54 Post 2010 Ambient CO Level` 7.4 7.4 7.4 3.7 3.7 3.7 Total CO Concentration 8.8 7.9 7.7 4.2 4.0 3.9 State Standard >20.0 >20.0 >20.0 >9.1 >9.1 >9.1 Federal Standard >35.0 >35.0 >35.0 >9.5 >9.5 >9.5 Standard Exceeded No No No No No No a. Includes the Travertine Specific Plan as well as La Quinta General Plan buildout. b. Receptor distances are measured from the roadway centerline. C. See the Appendix for details on how the background concentrations were derived. The purpose of an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) Consistency Finding is to determine whether or not a project is consistent with the assumptions and objectives of regional air quality management plans. Based on this determination, conclusions can be drawn regarding whether or not a specific project will interfere with the region's ability to comply with federal and state air quality standards. The Travertine Specific Plan would generate an operational air pollutant emissions burden that is consistent with the existing General Plan designations on-site. Since the City's existing General Plan is the basis for the AQMP emissions inventories, it appears that the project may be consistent with all of the key underlying assumptions associated with the AQMP. The Travertine project also appears to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the AQMP in that it provides jobs, retail uses, and recreational amenities that reduce the number of trips off- site and the trip lengths on-site. The mitigation measures described in Section 7.2.1, Air Quality, would minimize to the greatest extent feasible the potential air quality impacts attributable to a fully developed project. 55 No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no direct or indirect changes in existing air quality. 7.1.2 Areas of Environmental Concern There are no existing Special Areas or Areas of Critical Environmental Concern within the Travertine property. The proposed Conservation Area at the southern end of the Travertine property would provide a natural buffer to existing wilderness and national monument lands adjacent to the property. 7.1.3 Cultural Resources Proposed Action Eighteen cultural resource isolates and 11 prehistoric archaeological sites were determined to occur within the area of potential effect of the proposed project. The isolates consist primarily of single pottery sherds and are, as a class, not eligible for listing on the NRHP. Other isolates include lithic debitage. One cruciform rock feature was recorded as an isolate and is possibly of modern origin. The archaeological sites include bedrock milling features, rock shelters, trails, a possible camp area and a large Lake Cahuilla shoreline site. Of these 11 sites, three will be avoided through project redesign. The remaining eight sites have been determined to not be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. As a result of project redesign, which includes the establishment of a conservation easement and development of a Reasonable Prudent Alternative, there will be no effects to historic properties as a result of the proposed project. Travertine has proposed to enter into an agreement with Torres -Martinez Band of Desert Cahuilla to have the Tribe act as stewards of the conservation area. Due to the density of cultural resources within and adjacent to the project area, and the potential for subsurface cultural deposits, a qualified archaeologist will be required on site during groundbreaking activities. A discovery and treatment plan will be developed to provide for appropriate response to discoveries of buried cultural materials or human remains. No Action Alternative 56 ' Protection of cultural resources in the project area would be addressed on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act and other applicable regulations and (s policies. CA-RIV-7394 has been impacted by vandalism, collection of artifacts, and off-road vehicle use. C These impacts would continue. 7.1.4 Native American Concerns Proposed Action The project falls within the traditional use area of the Cahuilla Indians. The following tribes were contacted and provided with a description of the project and an overview of the results of the cultural resources inventory: Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians, Los Coyotes Band of Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Ramona Band of Mission Indians, Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Mission Indians, and Torres - Martinez Band of Desert Cahuilla. Requests from the Tribes include that Native American monitors be present during ground breaking activities and to be contacted in the case of inadvertent discovery of human remains. The Tribes' responses have either recommended that groups closer to the project be consulted or have deferred to Torres -Martinez as the Tribe most closely associated with the project area. Travertine has agreed to have Native American monitors present during groundbreaking activities. The BLM and Travertine have been working closely with the Torres -Martinez Band of Desert Cahuilla and have initiated formal government to government consultation with the Tribe. Consultation with continue and will include development of an inadvertent discovery plan. No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, Native American concerns in the project area would be addressed on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act and other applicable regulations and policies. l ( 7.1.5 Floodplains ( l Proposed Action ( l 57 t Direct Impacts. The Madison Street ROW is the only portion of the project within the 100 -year floodplain. Construction of the Madison Street extension would be accomplished so that existing floodplain patterns would not be altered. f ( Indirect Impacts. Construction of the Madison Street extension would not result in any direct { impacts to any 100 -year Floodplain Drainage Areas. No Action Alternative Under this alternative, there would be no impacts to any floodplains and change in existing surface flow patterns on the Travertine property. 7.1.6 Farmlands The project area does not include any farmlands designated as prime or unique by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, or enrolled under the State of California's Williamson Act, and there would be no impacts to any such areas. 7.1.7 Energy The proposed project is in compliance with the National Energy Policy. 7.1.8 Minerals Proposed Action Under the Proposed Action, the potential for future development of sand and gravel or energy 4 ` resources in the project area would be precluded. However, there is no indication that the i project area is an important source of sand and gravel or energy sources. 611001 r' r i- C No Action Alternative Under this alternative, there would be no change in the availability of existing sand and gravel or energy resources. 7.1.9 Threatened and Endangered Species Proposed Action Direct Impacts. There would be no direct impacts to any federally listed threatened or endangered species resulting from issuance of ROW permits and subsequent access road construction. However, issuance of ROW permits and subsequent access road construction would result in modification of less than four acres of designated Critical Habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep along Jefferson Street in the northeast corner of Section 32 near the Minestrelli Development. Indirect Impacts. The potential for impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep as a result of the proposed project is extremely limited based on the extensive mitigation measures described in Section 7.2.3, Threatened and Endangered Species. However, there are approximately 360 acres of designated Critical Habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep within the project area (Figures 2 and 4). Approximately fifty-eight percent of this Critical Habitat area (Figure 2) would be preserved in perpetuity as a Conservation Area. The remainder, approximately 267 acres, would be impacted by project -related development. The Conservation Area, which is located in the southern portion of the property in the vicinity of the Martinez Rock Slide, will provide an important buffer between the Travertine development and occupied habitat in the Santa Rosa Mountains, significantly reducing the potential for direct and indirect impacts to bighorn sheep. Travertine acknowledges that development of the Travertine property could potentially facilitate future land development in Section 5, which is adjacent to the Martinez Rock Slide and closer to potential sheep habitat, by bringing road and utility infrastructure nearer to this area. However, the potential for the proposed Travertine project to result in such indirect, interrelated, and/or interdependent impacts to potential sheep habitat outside the project area has been carefully addressed by Travertine in its negotiations with the Service and is considered negligible for the reasons described below. Approximately 40% of Section 5 is covered by the stringent regulations of the City of La Quinta Hillside Conservation Overlay District. The impediments to development in Section 5, both financial and engineering, are enormous and include severe hydrological obstacles (the area, particularly the northeast corner of Section 5, is subject to severe storm flows from the Santa Rosa Mountains). As a result, infrastructure development in this area would be very challenging and very expensive; development in the northeast corner of Section 5, for example, would require the construction of massive water diversion barriers to protect such development from storm flows. Such a commitment to development is considered even less likely given that there currently is no single landowner in Section 5 capable of such an 59 undertaking. For all of the foregoing reasons, development in Section 5, beyond the small area in which Travertine is permitted to develop under this plan, is extremely unlikely. Nevertheless, to further guarantee that the Travertine development would not result in indirect impacts to potential sheep habitat by facilitating future development in Section 5, Travertine has agreed to loan $2 million to Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) for land acquisition in Section 5, provided the CVMSHCP is approved. It is extremely unlikely that the Travertine development would result in any impacts to triple - ribbed milkvetch or desert tortoise. The three arroyo reaches delineated by Mr. Andrew Sanders, U.C. Riverside herbarium, as having either a "low" or "very low" probability of supporting triple -ribbed milkvetch are almost entirely within the Travertine Conservation Area described earlier. This Conservation Area will remain undeveloped in perpetuity and Travertine Corporation will avoid impacts to the potential habitat areas located immediately north of the RPA line. Based on the letter from Mr. Sanders to SWCA (see Appendix B), it is not unreasonable to assume that if the areas delineated in Figure 5 are avoided, then the Travertine development, as planned, is not likely to adversely affect this species. Consequently, no additional triple -ribbed milkvetch surveys of the Travertine property are considered necessary. Although there is an unsubstantiated report that the property may have been occupied historically by desert tortoise (two collapsed older burrows), there is no evidence that the site was occupied in the recent past and a literature search conducted by Ecological Ventures indicates that the property is in an area of the Colorado Desert that historically supported low desert tortoise densities. Also, the property is not within a Desert Wildlife Management Area or designated Critical Habitat for desert tortoise. Consequently, no indirect impacts to desert tortoise are anticipated given the absence of evidence suggesting that the property is currently occupied. No Action Alternative There would be no direct impacts to any federally listed threatened or endangered species, and no impacts to designated Critical Habitat of Peninsular bighorn sheep under this alternative. There would, however, be greater potential for unregulated human access into occupied sheep habitat in the Santa Rosa Mountains adjacent to the Travertine property. 7.1.10 State Listed Sensitive Species Proposed Action An in-depth analysis of impacts to State listed sensitive species is provided on pages 3.8-7 to 3.8-9 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). .8 fI r According to the CEQA Guidelines, impacts on biological resources may be considered C. significant if the project will: (a) substantially affect a rare or endangered species of animal or C plant or the habitat of a species; or (b) interfere substantially with the movement of any resident r or migratory fish or wildlife species. Impacts may be considered significant if the project will disturb an important local biological resource. This includes any "Species of Concern as C identified by the State of California Department of Fish and Game." C Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a "significant effect on the environment" as "a substantial or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic and aesthetic significance." In addition to the general loss of natural habitat, impacts to individual sensitive wildlife species also are interpreted as significant under CEQA (Guidelines, Section 15380). ( Direct Impacts. Issuance of the Madison Street ROW permit and subsequent access road f construction across federal lands potentially could directly impact round -tailed ground squirrel habitat. However, potential impacts have not yet been determined. Indirect Impacts. There are approximately 712 acres of relatively undisturbed native desert vegetation within the 941 -acre project area; 229 acres have already been developed as a vineyard. Other than the Conservation Area, the remaining acres of desert vegetation would be directly impacted by the proposed development. The project would eliminate a portion of the population of a sensitive plant, the California barrel cactus, which was found on the rocky plains and slopes on the site. This species is listed by the Service as a Category 2 species. Another sensitive plant that could be impacted is Cove's cassia. The project would also eliminate potential habitat for sensitive plant species on-site. The project would eliminate potential nesting and/or foraging habitat for three sensitive birds found on the site. These are the prairie falcon, black -tailed gnatcatcher, and the loggerhead shrike. Both the prairie falcon and the black -tailed gnatcatcher are listed by CDFG as Species of Special Concern (CSC). The loggerhead shrike is on the Blue List of local concern but is not considered sensitive in the area as local breeding populations are stable. The Southeast area of the Travertine site is occupied habitat of the round -tailed ground squirrel and coincides with the approximate location of part of the planned desert -style golf course. The occupied squirrel habitat also extends outside the boundaries of the project to the east near the flood control area. The above-mentioned potential impacts would be mitigated to less than a significant level based on the measures described in Section 7.2.4, State Listed Sensitive Species. 62 The project has the potential to impact the blueline stream course on-site due to construction activities. The project's disturbance to the blueline stream course will require a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFG. The agreement must be accompanied by a mitigation plan, including provisions for environmental monitoring pursuant to CDFG Code Section 21081.6. Typical mitigation measures would include revegetation of the disturbed areas and timing construction to avoid the spring nesting season of sensitive bird species. Impacts to the blueline stream course would be mitigated to a less than significant level. No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no direct impacts to any state -listed sensitive species. 7.1.11 Invasive, Non -Native Species Proposed Action Direct Impacts. Under the Proposed Action alternative, the potential for introduction or spread of invasive, non-native species exists primarily during construction of the proposed access roads and the Travertine development itself. This potential can be minimized by implementation of construction Best Management Practices such as washing vehicles, tires, and equipment brought in from other states or other parts of the state prior to use on site to remove any seeds or plant parts that could become established. Indirect Impacts. The Travertine development could provide increased opportunities for the introduction or spread of invasive, non-native plant species, if such species were introduced into the human and natural landscapes. Thus, to prevent this, the use of certain species in landscape plantings will be prohibited through the appropriate conditions of development and establishment in the project's CC&R's (see also mitigation measures in Section 7.2.3, Threatened and Endangered Species). These prohibited species shall at a minimum consist of the plants identified by the California Invasive Plant Council in their Most Invasive Wildland Pest Plant tables for desert areas (Table 7), and utilize appropriate control measures for such species. No Action Alternative Under this alternative, the Travertine property would be subject to the introduction of invasive, non-native plant species resulting from unregulated vehicular access. 63 Table 7. Most Invasive Wildland Pest Plants, California Invasive Plant Council. Latin Name Common Name Habitats of Concern Arundo donax Atriplex semibaccata Brassica tournefortii Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens Bromus tectorum Centaurea solstitialis Cynara cardunculus Elaeagnus angustifolia Foeniculum vulgare Rubus discolor giant reed, arundo Australian saltbush Moroccan or African mustard red brome cheat grass, downy brome yellow starthistle artichoke thistle Russian olive wild fennel Himalayan blackberry Tamarix chinensis, Tamarisk, salt cedar T. gallica, T. parviflora & T. ramosissima 7.1.12 Wastes (Hazardous/Solid) Proposed Action Riparian areas Southern California coastal grasslands, scrub, "high marsh" of coastal salt marshes, other areas. Washes, alkaline flats, disturbed areas in Sonoran Desert. Widespread; contributing to Southern California scrub, desert scrub type conversions; increases fire frequency. Sagebrush, pinyon -juniper, other desert communities; increases fire frequency. Grasslands. Grasslands. Horticultural; interior riparian areas. Southern California grasslands; the cultivated garden herb is not invasive. Riparian areas, marshes, oak woodlands. Desert washes, riparian areas, seeps and springs. Construction equipment on the site would use materials such as fuel and oil. These materials would be used on the site during construction and would be removed on completion of the project. With the implementation of spill -control measures from the project's Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, impacts would be minor. For additional mitigation see Section 7.2.5, Wastes (Hazardous/Solid). [:EI e',. r r C No Action Alternative r C The potential for illegal, unregulated dumping on the Travertine project area would increase r under this alternative. C 7.1.13 Water Quality (Surface/Ground) Proposed Action An in-depth analysis of impacts to water resources is provided on pages 3.5-3 to 3.5-10 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a "significant effect on the environment' as "a substantial or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic and aesthetic significance." For water services, a significant impact would occur if the proposed Specific Plan would: (1) result in the need for extension of water services from existing service areas to new areas, (2) increase withdrawals leading to overdraft of groundwater aquifers, without significant recharge efforts, or (3) degrade groundwater quality due to increased pumpage within an overdrafted basin. For sewer services, a significant impact would occur if the proposed Specific Plan would (1) exceed the capacities of existing and planned wastewater treatment facilities or (2) result in the need for the new expansion of existing collection and treatment facilities or expansion beyond master planned facilities. Direct Impacts. The granting of ROW easements would not result in any significant direct impacts to water quality. Indirect Impacts. The proposed Travertine project would develop up to 2,000 residential units, up to 36 holes of golf, with a practice range and clubhouse, a 27 -acre, 500 -room hotel, a 4 -acre tennis facility, and a 10 -acre commercial center. Water service to the project site will be provided by CVWD with an approximately 24 -inch mainline within the Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 alignments, and an approximately 30 -inch mainline in the Madison Street alignment. Within the project area, 12 -inch lines will then feed off the main line to serve individual clusters of development. Water demands were generated utilizing generation factors provided by the City of La Quinta General Plan EIR. The total water demand for the Travertine project, utilizing CVWD generation 65 factor of 1,500 gallons/dwelling unit/day, would be significantly less than the approximately 5,566,212 gallons/day (gpd) originally estimated at full buildout. CVWD will require one well per r 70 acres of a site or one well per 400 dwelling units, whichever provides the greater number of C, wells. In the case of Travertine, CVWD could require approximately 13 wells. However, only 5 r may be active to service the development while the balance would remain inactive. CVWD would require these wells to be a minimum of 1000 feet apart. In order to space 5 to 13 wells 1,000 feet apart, the applicant may be required to acquire additional well site locations off-site, as well as on-site. The precise location of these wells has not been approved at this time and ultimate locations will be determined by CVWD. However, without knowing the location of any off-site wells, impacts as a result of off-site well locations cannot be specifically determined at this time. Potentially significant site disturbance impacts or drawdown effects on nearby wells could result from these unknown well locations off-site. Since portions of the Travertine property are within Improvement District No. 1, water from the Coachella Canal can be made available and should be used for golf course and green belt irrigation purposes.' The project would generate a total of approximately 99,450 gpd of sewage. Of the total amount generated, the estate lots would generate 4,000 gpd, which would be transmitted through the existing infrastructure of the Quarry development. The project would require that the existing 10 -inch sewer line be extended 2,000 feet west, from within the Jefferson Street ROW at PGA West to the eastern portion of the project. The project will also require another sewer line extending underneath the Dike along Avenue 62, connecting to the sewer lift station at Trilogy. The construction of this specific sewer line would not disturb the clay core of the Dike. Eight -inch sewer lines will extend through the development. Sewer services to the proposed estate lots may require connection to the existing 8 -inch line located within the Quarry development. Based on the proposed residential density of the project and wastewater generation rates from the City of La Quinta General Plan, the residential uses would increase the total current City generation of sewage of 1.49 mgd to 1.59 mgd.Z The estimated wastewater generated by the project is within the planned capacity of the Mid -City Wastewater Treatment Plant. Furthermore, potential impacts to water quality are addressed based on the mitigation measures described in Section 7.2.6, Water Quality. ' Letter from Tom Levy at CVJVD, dated Dec. 6, 1994. 2 City of La Quinta General Plan 1992, Table IPS -1 Existing Infrastructure and Public Services Status, Chapter 7, pg. l 7-2. 66 n P No Action Alternative Ir Under this alternative, there would be no direct changes to existing water quality in the proposed project area. 7.1.14 Wetlands/Riparian Zones There are no wetlands or riparian zones within or immediately adjacent to the Travertine property and there would be no impacts to any such areas. 7.1.15 Wild and Scenic Rivers There are no specially designated wild and scenic rivers within or adjacent to the Travertine property, and there would be no impacts to any such areas. 7.1.16 Wilderness Travertine would create a Conservation Area as a buffer at the southern end of the property and enforce strict regulations throughout the property regarding access to adjacent federally designated wilderness Santa Rosa Wilderness Area and Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument (see Fig. 4). 7.1.17 Environmental Justice Proposed Action In 1992, Congress authorized the Electric and Magnetic Fields Research and Public Information Dissemination Program (EMF -RAPID) in the Energy Policy Act. At that time, Congress instructed the National Institute of Environmental Health Services (NIEHS), National Institutes of Health, and the U.S. Department of Energy to direct and manage a program of research aimed at providing scientific evidence to clarify the potential for health risks from exposure to extremely low frequency electric and magnetic fields (ELF -EMF). NIEHS was mandated upon completion of the Program to provide a report outlining the possible human health risks associated with exposure to ELF -EMF. In June 1999, NIEHS released its report Health Effects from Exposure to Power -line Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields (NIEHS .1999). Travertine will coordinate with IIDE to run the 92 kV transmission lines along the right-of-way of Avenue 62, approximately 1 mile from the nearest minority and low income residences near Monroe Street. The electrical substation, if required by IIDE, will be sited at minimum of more than 1 mile away from the nearest minority and low income residences near Monroe Street. 67 1 C r Direct Impacts. Due to the location of the siting of the transmission lines, and substation if required, more than 1 mile away from the nearest minority and low income residences near Monroe Street, there will not be any EMF exposure on those populations in the vicinity of C Travertine. Indirect Impacts. No indirect impacts are anticipated. No Action Alternative There would be no impacts to minority or low-income populations under the No Action Alternative. 7.1.18 Health and Safety Risks to Children The Travertine development would not result in any obvious health and safety risks to children. 7.1.19 Visual Resource Management Proposed Action An in-depth analysis of visual resources is provided on pages 3.9-11 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). Aesthetic impact evaluation is often subject to more subjective assessment determinations than the other environmental issues analyzed in this document. In keeping with CEQA and for the purposes of this EIR, a significant adverse visual and light/glare impact is defined as one which has a substantial and demonstrable negative aesthetic effect (i.e., alteration to the existing visual character of the site); production of light and glare which may disturb activities in adjacent areas; or the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public. This EIR can only address visual impacts on a qualitative level given the subjective nature of visual impacts and the proposed Specific Plans. Direct Impacts. Issuance of ROW permits and subsequent access road construction would have minimal direct impacts to visual resources in the project area. Indirect Impacts. The Travertine Specific Plan would represent a distinct variation from the existing character of the project site in terms of the development, density and scale. The existing viewsheds from both on- and off-site would not be significantly altered, however, as a considerable amount of open space views has already been modified to varying degrees by nearby ongoing recreational/residential developments (i.e., Trilogy La Quinta and Coral Mountain). With time, this impact is anticipated to decrease as each additional development is perceived as less of an impacting source than the development prior. However, the current project represents a major development in the area and implementation of the proposed project will reduce open space views that are currently available to the public. As previously stated, vacant lands surround the Travertine Specific Plan. These vacant lands are designated under the Riverside County General Plan as agricultural to the east, mountains to the west and south, and County Park to the northwest. In addition, the Martinez Rock Slide is considered a significant scenic vista and, therefore, the project will have a negative aesthetic effect on these surrounding areas. Streetlights are proposed with implementation of the project. This increase in lighting may be perceived by existing residents of the surrounding area as a significant impact. This impact is anticipated to decrease over time as residents become accustomed to this new source of light at Travertine and nearby developments. Carefully designed lighting can minimize these impacts. A mitigation measure is proposed to ensure that on-site exterior streetlights are designed in accordance with City standards to minimize impacts onto adjacent areas and to reduce perceived impacts to a less than significant level. Implementation of the proposed project could also increase the amount of glare in the area depending on the specific types of lighting and building materials used. Mitigation measures have been proposed to reduce the potential visual impacts to the extent feasible (see Section 7.2.7, Visual Resource Management). No Action Alternative There would be no change in the existing form, line, color, or texture of existing visual resources on the project site as a result of this alternative. However, as nearby planned developments are built, the amount of lighting in the project area will continue to increase over time. 7.1.20 Land Use Proposed Action Direct Impacts. Issuance of ROW permits and subsequent access road construction across federal lands would result in minimal direct land use impacts in the project area. Indirect Impacts. The applicant has a Specific Plan approved by City of La Quinta. The Travertine Specific Plan proposes a master -planned resort community with residential, commercial, and open space/recreational uses. Up to approximately 2,000 residential units would be oriented to take advantage of the mountains, valley, and proposed golf course. The residential component of the project would consist of estate homes, resort homes, and villas. Lot sizes could range from approximately 3,600 to 10,000 square feet. We r The project includes a 31 -acre hotel/conference center with comprehensive visitor facilities C including tennis, spa, and other recreational facilities. The project proposes a separate tennis club, which would be located in the southern portion of the community, near the golf practice (' range and abutting Madison Street. Additionally, many individual residential planning areas would include swimming pools and other recreational facilities. Approximately 10 acres would be allocated to neighborhood commercial uses, accommodating community residents, visitors, and the adjacent City of La Quinta community. The 36 golf holes would be integrated into the residential development as a desert -style development with natural landscaping. Proposed General Plan Designations. The Travertine Specific Plan proposes the following major General Plan Designations: Low Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Tourist Commercial, and Golf Course Open Space. The specific impacts resulting from the proposed changes to the General Plan Land Use Map are described below. • Low Density Residential - According to the General Plan, the gross density standard for this category ranges from 2 to 4 dwelling units/acre. According to Policy 2-1.1.9 of the General Plan, Conditions for Varying Residential Use Guidelines, Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) and High Density Residential (HDR) uses will be allowed to locate in areas designated on the Land Use Policy Diagram as Low Density Residential (LDR), providing a Specific Plan application is filed and overall project density is consistent with the underlying Land Use Policy Density. For the Travertine project site, the gross density proposed would be 1.9 dwelling units per acre, based on up to 2,000 units. . The Travertine project, as currently proposed, is consistent with the allowable land use densities of the General Plan, and with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Open Space and Hillside Conservation Zone designations. • Neighborhood Commercial — The proposed 10 acres of neighborhood commercial would be located in an area designated as Low Density Residential (LDR) under the existing General Plan. • Resort Hotel/Conference Center — The proposed 31 -acre hotel/conference center and tennis club would be located in an area designated as Low Density Residential under the existing General Plan. • Land Use Conversion — The project would result in the loss of up to 554 acres of existing open space and agricultural land. Not included is the Conservation Area and the Open Space associated with the desert -style golf holes. 70 County of Riverside General Plan Designations. The Travertine Specific Plan is consistent with the intent of the County of Riverside General Plan to encourage growth and urbanization within the La Quinta-Coachella sub -community. In particular, the Travertine Specific Plan is compatible with the County -approved Specific Plan 218 development of residential and commercial uses. No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no immediate change in existing use of the Travertine property. 7.1.21 Noise Proposed Action An in-depth analysis of noise impacts is provided on pages 3.3-3 to 3.3-15 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). Direct Impacts. Issuance of ROW permits and subsequent access road construction across federal lands would result in minimal direct noise impacts in the project area. Indirect Impacts. Short-term acoustic impacts are those associated with construction activities necessary to implement the proposed land uses on-site. These noise levels will be higher than the ambient noise levels in the project area today, but will subside once construction is completed. Two types of noise impacts should be considered during the construction phase. First, the transport of workers and equipment to the construction site will incrementally increase noise levels along the roadways leading to and from the site. The increase, although temporary in nature, could be audible to noise receptors located along the roadways utilized for this purpose. Second, the noise generated by the actual on-site construction activities should be evaluated. Table 8 depicts typical construction equipment noise ranges at a distance of 50 feet. Long-term acoustic impacts could occur both on-site and off-site if the proposed Travertine Specific Plan is approved and implemented. Off-site noise impacts will result primarily from project -related traffic on site access roads. On-site acoustic impacts could result from motor vehicle noise generated by ultimate traffic volumes on the master planned roadways adjacent to the two project sites. 71 Table 8. Existing Exterior Noise Exposure Adjacent to Nearby Roadways Roadway A.D.T.a CNEL@ Distance to Contours (Ft.)` (Veh/Day) 100 Feetb 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dB Jefferson Street -North of Avenue 50 11,320 69.2 83 263 830 -North of Avenue 52 6,850 67.0 RNV 159 503 -North of Avenue 54 6,350 66.7 RNV 147 466 Madison Street -North of Avenue 52 510 55.8 RNV RNV R/W -North of Airport Blvd 710 57.2 RNV RNV 54 -North of Avenue 58 1,030 58.8 RNV RNV 76 -North of Avenue 60 160 50.7 RNV RNV R/W Monroe Street -North of Avenue 50 14,260 70.2 105 331 1047 -North of Avenue 52 7,760 67.6 57 180 569 -North of Avenue 54 3,500 64.1 R/W 81 257 -North of Airport Blvd 2,980 63.4 RNV 69 219 -North of Avenue 58 1,310 59.8 RNV RNV 96 -North of Avenue 60 990 58.6 RNV RNV 73 -North of Avenue 62 570 56.2 RNV RNV RNV Avenue 50 -West of Jefferson Street 7,890 67.6 58 183 578 -West of Madison Street 6,530 66.8 RNV 152 479 -West of Monroe Street 7,480 67.4 55 174 549 -East of Monroe Street 9,030 68.2 67 210 663 Avenue 52 -West of Jefferson Street 7,870 67.7 60 183 577 -West of Madison Street 4,740 65.4 RNV 110 347 -West of Monroe Street 4,690 65.4 RNV 109 344 -East of Monroe Street 4,340 65.0 RNV 101 318 Avenue 54 -West of Jefferson Street 190 51.4 RNV RNV RNV -West of Madison Street 2,170 62.1 RNV 53 160 -West of Monroe Street 930 58.3 RNV RNV 68 -East of Monroe Street 1,202 58.7 RNV RNV 75 Airport Blvd. -West of Monroe Street 640 56.7 RNV R/W RNV -East of Monroe Street 2,030 61.7 RNV RNV 149 72 Table 8, Continued. Existing Exterior Noise Exposure Adjacent to Nearby Roadways Roadway A.D.T." CNEL@ Distance to Contours (Ft.)' (Veh/Day) 100 Feetb 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dB Avenue 58 -West of Madison Street -West of Monroe Street -East of Monroe Street Avenue 60 -West of Monroe Street -East of Monroe Street Avenue 62 -East of Monroe Street 740 57.3 R/W R/W 54 790 57.6 R/W R/W 58 850 58.0 R/W R/W 63 160 50.7 R/W R/W R/w 210 51.9 R/W R/W R/W 530 55.9 R/W R/W R/W a. A.D.T.: Average Daily two-way Traffic volume. b. CNEL values are given at 100 feet from roadway centerlines. C. Al distances are measured from the centerline. R/W means the contour falls within the right-of-way. By the Year 2006, it is estimated that Travertine will have built 250 dwelling units, and therefore, will not generate audible noise increases (greater than 3.0 dBA) along any of the links analyzed for year 2006 conditions as indicated in Table 9, Year 2006 Project Related Increase. Potentially audible noise increases (between 1.0 and 3.0 dBA) are projected to occur with year 2006 traffic from the Travertine Specific Plan along the following roadway links: • Madison St./North of Airport Blvd. • Madison St./North of Avenue 58 • Avenue 54/West of Madison St. • Avenue 58/West of Madison St. Noise increases along these links will increase 1.0 to 2.4 decibels as a result of the addition of project traffic. The Year 2006 + project 70 CNEL contours along three of these four links will remain within the roadway right-of-way. The 70 CNEL contour will be 54 feet from the centerline along the fourth link (Avenue 54, west of Madison Street). Inaudible noise increases (less than 1.0 dBA) will result adjacent to the remaining thirty roadway links analyzed. Potential noise impacts would be reduced to less than a significant level based on the mitigation measures described in Section 7.2.9, Noise. 73 Table 9. Year 2006 Project -Related Increase In Motor Vehicle Noise (250 Units Travertine and Ambient Noise) 74 Travertine Specific Plan Roadway Ambient Total Increase Link CNEL CNELa (dBA) Jefferson Street -North of Avenue 50 71.0 71.3 0.3 -North of Avenue 52 69.6 69.9 0.3 -North of Avenue 54 69.5 70.0 0.5 Madison Street -North of Avenue 52 60.1 60.1 0.0 -North of Airport Blvd 64.4 66.1 1.7 -North of Avenue 58 64.8 66.5 1.7 -North of Avenue 60 56.1 56.3 0.2 Monroe Street -North of Avenue 50 70.3 70.4 0.1 -North of Avenue 52 68.7 68.9 0.2 -North of Avenue 54 66.1 66.4 0.3 -North of Airport Blvd 65.4 65.7 0.3 -North of Avenue 58 63.0 63.5 0.5 -North of Avenue 60 59.3 59.3 0.0 -North of Avenue 62 56.3 56.3 0.0 Avenue 50 -West of Jefferson Street 69.0 69.1 0.1 -West of Madison Street 68.1 68.1 0.0 -West of Monroe Street 68.3 68.3 0.0 -East of Monroe Street 68.8 68.9 0.1 Avenue 52 -West of Jefferson Street 69.2 69.4 0.2 -West of Madison Street 66.7 66.7 0.0 -West of Monroe Street 66.3 66.4 0.1 -East of Monroe Street 65.6 65.6 0.0 Avenue 54 -West of Jefferson Street 51.5 51.5 0.0 -West of Madison Street 6.1 67.1 1.0 -West of Monroe Street 61.3 61.9 0.6 -East of Monroe Street 61.0 61.4 0.4 Airport Blvd. -West of Monroe Street 59.3 59.7 0.4 -East of Monroe Street 63.5 63.6 0.1 74 Table 9, continued. Year 2006 project -Related Increase In Motor Vehicle Noise (250 Units Travertine and Ambient Noise) Roadway Link Avenue 58 -West of Madison Street -West of Monroe Street -East of Monroe Street Avenue 60 -West of Monroe Street -East of Monroe Street Avenue 62 -East of Monroe Street a. All distances measured 100 feet from the centerline No Action Alternative Travertine Specific Plan Ambient Total Increase CNEL CNELa (dBA) 64.1 66.3 2.2 61.6 62.5 0.9 60.5 60.9 0.4 51.3 51.9 0.6 52.4 52.8 0.4 55.9 56.0 0.1 Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no immediate change in existing noise levels in the project area. However, as nearby planned developments are built, the "baseline" existing noise levels in the project area will continue to increase over time. 7.1.22 Geology/Soils Proposed Action An in-depth analysis of impacts to geology/soils is provided on pages 3.6-5 to 3.6-8 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). The CEQA Guidelines supplementary Document G — Significant Effects identifies the following as having a significant effect on the environment: (q) causing substantial flooding, erosion or siltation; and (r) exposing people or structures to major geologic hazards. Direct Impacts. Issuance of ROW easements across federal lands would not result in any significant direct impacts to local geology/soils in the project area. Indirect Impacts. Project related construction and grading of Myoma or Carrizo Series and other soil types on site might be subject to high wind erosion potential. The Travertine Specific 75 Plan proposes to construct a desert -style golf course and resort homes partially on rubble land (RU), rock outcrop (RO), and Carrizo stony sand (CcC). The Travertine project would develop single-family residences, a resort/hotel, and golf holes within Groundshaking Zone III. These land uses are considered Normal — Low Risk' Land Uses and are Provisionally Suitable. According to the County of Riverside Land Uses Suitability discussion, expected levels of groundshaking within this zone are generally less or equal to design levels as defined in the Uniform Building Code (UBC).' Because the City, as a whole, is located upon a large structural depression of alluvial deposits overlayed upon granitic strata of the surrounding mountain ranges, the groundshaking caused by these faults would cause these alluvial sediments to consolidate, creating the potential for ground rupture, liquefaction and landsliding. The entire development would be subject to potential seismic -related impacts. Major fault zones, including the San Andreas, San Jacinto, and Elsinore, have a history of producing seismic events in Southern California which would be detrimental to land uses within the Hillside Conservation Zone and unreinforced structures constructed of weak material and/or poor craftsmanship. The project site may be subject to erosion due to the active uplift of regional faults, relatively soft rock units, sparse vegetation and seasonal rains. Generally, erosion in the desert can be reduced by minimizing soil disturbances and diverting seasonal runoff from areas of high potential erosion. However, potential erosion impacts would be mitigated to a level of insignificance (see Section 7.2.10, Geology/Soils). The project site may be subject to slides from adjacent existing formations such as the Martinez Rock Slide. However, the proposed Conservation Area and golf course would mitigate potential slide and/or rockfall impacts to a less than significant level by providing a buffer between homes and other structures along the southern portion of the Travertine site. No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no immediate change in potential soil erosion in the project area. ' County of Riverside Comprehensive General Plan, pages 303-308, 12/19/89. 76 7.1.23 Recreation Proposed Action An in-depth analysis of impacts to recreation is provided on pages 3.11-3 to 3.11-4 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). Impacts on recreational facilities are considered significant if the project creates a demand for recreational services that exceeds the design or use standard of existing and/or planned facilities. Direct Impacts. Issuance of ROW permits would not result in any direct impacts in recreation use. Indirect Impacts. The proposed Travertine development would provide a variety of recreational opportunities. A resort hotel/conference center, encompassing approximately 27 acres, up to 36 holes of golf and a driving range, and a tennis facility will provide recreational opportunities for both residents and visitors to the Travertine community. The County of Riverside has identified Regional and Community Trails, which traverse the Travertine Specific Plan site. The County requires that these trails be preserved. Annexation No. 9, which includes the project site, incorporated the County Trails into the City of La Quinta trail system. The trail system provides access to the Martinez Rock Slide. The Boo Hoff trail, which traverses the southern portion of the Travertine site, will be relocated from its current location. Relocation of this trail will be coordinated through BLM, the responsible managing agency for this trail. In addition, the project will connect the equestrian trail system in the City of La Quinta with the County of Riverside Master Trails system to the south of the project site. No public trails would be located through the Travertine project area as a result of this development and the mitigation measures proposed in Section 7.2.3, Threatened and Endangered Species, will greatly reduce the potential for unauthorized recreational use in the adjacent Santa Rosa Mountains. The project would be consistent with the above-mentioned policies since it provides for hiking and equestrian trails which link existing trails within the City's open space areas and also connect with the County of Riverside's trails system via the trail proposed by Coachella Valley Recreational Park District along the top of Dike No. 4 in cooperation with BOR. No Action Alternative The property would be available for current levels of recreation, including unregulated access to the Santa Rosa Mountains adjacent to the Travertine project site. 77 7.1.24 Social and Economic Resources Proposed Action Direct Impacts. The issuance of ROW easements across BLM and BOR lands would not result in any direct impacts to social or economic resources. Indirect Impacts. The proposed Travertine development is expected to result in positive social and economic benefits to the La Quinta area through increased employment, sales tax revenues, business and occupancy tax revenues, and property tax revenues. However, no economic studies have yet been performed to quantify these benefits. No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no additional revenues generated for the La Quinta area. 7.1.25 Traffic and Circulation Proposed Action Direct Impacts. The issuance of ROW easements across BLM and BOR lands would not result in any direct impacts to local traffic and circulation. Indirect Impacts. An in-depth analysis of traffic and circulation impacts in the project area is provided on pages 3.2-12 to 3.2-18 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a). In this 1995 Environmental Impact Report, traffic impacts are based on primary access along the proposed Madison Street extension (between Avenue 60 and Avenue 62). However, impacts also are based on a total of 2,300 residential units. The number of residential units in the current development plan has been reduced significantly to up to 2,000. This reduction in the number of residential units is expected to result in traffic impacts that are significantly reduced from those described in the 1995 Environmental Impact Report, which is incorporated by reference below. Additional mitigation measures designed to reduce impacts to less than a significant level are described in Section 7.2.12, Traffic and Circulation. In the 1995 Environmental Impact Report, potential trip generation was calculated from the regression equations included in the Institute of Transportation Engineers 1991 publication entitled "Trip Generation" (5th Edition). Based on these calculations, it was estimated that the 1995 Travertine Specific Plan would generate an estimated 27,820 unadjusted average 78 weekday trips. Of that total, approximately 2,608 trip -ends would occur during the evening peak hour (1,561 inbound and 1,047 outbound) and another 1,627 trip -ends would occur during the morning peak hour. Due to the potential for trip overlap on the project site (i.e., trip interactions on-site between the residences and/or the hotel and commercial uses), an adjusted trip generation forecast was calculated to reflect the trip overlap, thereby reducing the total trip generation. Based on an adjusted trip generation forecast, the 1995 Travertine Specific Plan would generate an estimated 23,820 adjusted external average weekday trips at build -out. This is a 4,000 average weekday trip reduction from the unadjusted weekday trip analysis. Of the 23,820 trips, an estimated 2,268 external trip -ends would occur during the evening peak hour (1,391 inbound and 877 outbound). In the 1995 Travertine Specific Plan, Year 2000 total daily traffic volumes are estimated at 2,400 average weekday trips, of which 246 trip ends would occur during the evening peak hour (160 inbound trips and 86 outbound trips). Compared with 1995, Year 2000 total daily traffic volumes represent a significant increase. 7.2 MITIGATION MEASURES 7.2.1 Air Quality Mitigation measures are provided on pages 3.4-15 to 3.4-17 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a) and listed below. 1. Prior to issuance of grading permits, cut and fill shall be balanced on-site. 2. During grading, construction equipment using diesel drive internal combustion engines will use a diesel fuel with a maximum of 0.05% sulfur and a four -degree retard. 3. During grading, the preferential use of diesel -powered construction equipment, rather that gasoline -powered equipment, will reduce exhaust emission and evaporative and crankcase Hydrocarbon emissions. This will be determined prior to the issuance of grading permits. Grading activities should be scheduled to occur during the fall and winter months when rainfall in the project area is the greatest. Construction activities should be minimized during the windy season from March through June. Grading operations shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 30 mph. Grading scheduling will be reviewed and approved by the Engineering/Public Works Department prior to the issuance of grading permits. 4. Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to partially mitigate the impact of construction -generated dust particulates. The water should be reclaimed or agricultural canal type, whenever available. Portions of the project site that are undergoing earth moving operations shall be watered regularly such that a crust will be formed on the 79 ground surface and then watered again at the end of the day. Watering techniques for the reduction of dust shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering/Public Works C Department, prior to the issuance of grading permits. ( 5. Any vegetative ground cover to be utilized on-site shall be planted as soon as possible C. to reduce the amount of open space subject to wind erosion. Irrigation systems needed �( to water these plants shall be installed as soon as possible to maintain the ground cover f and minimize wind erosion of the soil. Ground cover and irrigation systems shall be i approved by the Community Development and Engineering/Public Works Departments, prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. Construction access roads shall be paved as the Engineering/Public Works Department t has approved the infrastructure plans and issued the grading permit. Construction access roads shall be cleaned after each workday. The maximum vehicle speed limit on f unpaved roads should be 15 mph. 7. During grading, SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site. (See the Appendix for additional details). 8. During construction, SCAQMD Rules 1108 and 1108.1 shall be adhered to, prohibiting the use of rapid and medium cure cutback asphalts as well as organic compounds in f emulsified asphalts used during the construction process. 9. During construction, -SCAQMD Rule 1113 shall be adhered to, restricting the VOC content of any architectural coating materials used on-site to a maximum of 2.08 pounds of VOC per gallon. 10. Construction personnel shall be informed of ridesharing and transit opportunities, prior to the start of construction. 11. Prior to the issuance of building permits, construction parking shall be configured to minimize traffic interference and comply with the City requirements as reviewed by the Engineering/Public Works and Community Development Departments. 12. Construction operations affecting off-site roadways shall be scheduled for off-peak traffic hours and shall minimize obstruction of through -traffic lanes. (AQMP Control Measure l 3.a. Truck Dispatching, Rescheduling and Reporting [ROG, NO, PM]). 13. During grading and construction, the project proponents will comply with all applicable SCAQMD "Rules and Regulations". 14. The project proponents will comply with the La Quinta Air Quality Element policies to the maximum extent feasible and all provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code, as reviewed by the Community Development Department. f 15. A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan shall be prepared and approved prior to issuance of building permits for the Travertine project that addresses the proposed 500 -room hotel and specifies capital improvements and operational strategies a needed to meet the City's 1.3 vehicle occupancy rate goal. 16. The proposed project will comply with SCAQMD Regulation XV, the City's TDM Ordinance and any other relevant wind erosion and blows and programs, prior to the :E issuance of grading permits, as reviewed by the Community Development Department and Engineering/Public Works Departments during grading and construction. 17. Future stationary sources of air pollutants shall adhere to applicable SCAQMD "Rules and Regulations", as monitored by the Community Development and Engineering/Public Works Departments during the grading and construction phases. 18. During the plan check, the Engineering/Public Works and Building and Safety Departments shall review the proposed project for the inclusion of bicycle lanes. The provision of bicycle lanes should encourage the use of alternate modes of transportation. 19. Safe and convenient pedestrian paths should be provided to encourage walking as a mode of transportation between related on-site facilities. 20. Building construction shall comply with the energy use guidelines in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. The Building and Safety and Community Development Departments shall ensure that the energy use guidelines have been complied with prior to occupancy. 21. Low emission building materials such as pre -primed and sanded wallboard, wood moulding and trim products should be considered for construction materials wherever feasible. Low emission building materials shall be reviewed and approved by the Building and Safety Department prior to issuance of building permits. 22. Prior to the issuance of building permits, consideration should be given to the use of solar water heaters and solar pool heaters. 23. Prior to the issuance of building permits, considerations should be given to the use of low -polluting and high efficiency appliances. 24. Prior to final map approval, the design of recreational and green belt areas should maximize the shading effect of landscaping for streets, parking areas and building walls. This shading effect could result in reduced air conditioning demand for electrical energy. 7.2.2 Cultural Resources The following mitigation measures were identified in the 1999 Travertine Specific Plan (The Keith Companies 1999). 1. A trained archaeological monitor shall be present during the project's construction and grading operations to evaluate and coordinate the recovery of any archaeological resources uncovered. 2. A trained archaeological monitor shall be present during the project's construction and grading operations to ensure that any work or land disruption in the off-site archaeological areas (CA-RIV-1334, CA-RIV-1351, and CA-RIV-1342) be avoided. 51 7.2.3 Threatened and Endangered Species Travertine Corporation has made a significant effort to avoid adverse impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep resulting from the proposed development. The original Travertine Specific Plan (1995) proposed a density of 2,300 residential units and 36 holes of golf (two 18 -hole golf courses). This original proposal was approved by the City of La Quinta on June 6, 1995, subject to the following conditions of approval: that the Estate Homes planning area switch with the golf course corridor located at the southern portion of the project site to provide an open space setback. These changes, which were included in the revised Specific Plan (1999), did not affect the overall density or number of residential units or golf holes. Following meetings in 2003 with the Service and CDFG, the development plan was extensively modified and reconfigured to limit or remove development in the southern portion of the Travertine property, specifically Section 5 and the vicinity of the Martinez Rock Slide. This included reducing the density of housing to the presently proposed up to 2,000 units, and creating a Conservation Area. The Conservation Area, which would be preserved in perpetuity through a deed restriction, is Travertine -owned land located in the southern portion of the property adjacent to the Martinez Rock Slide (Figure 1)1. The only project -related development in the Conservation Area will be the water reservoirs located in Section 5.Z The Conservation Area boundaries were established on 1 May 2003 during a field visit between Travertine, the Service, and CDFG (S. DeLateur, attorney representing Travertine Corporation, personal communication to K. Kertell, SWCA, on 20 January 2004). These boundaries were finalized through consultation with the Service on 7 December 2005. This Conservation Area would become part of the Habitat Reserve of the Coachella Valley Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), if and when the CVMSHCP is adopted. These and other proposed changes to the land plan were prepared to address the letter and spirit of the Specific Plan Conditions of Approval and the recommendations of the Service and three eminent bighorn sheep biologists, Dr. Paul Krausman, Dr. Jack Turner, and Dr. Chuck Douglas. In addition to the aforementioned major changes to the development plan, Travertine Corporation has adopted a variety of additional measures proposed by the Service to avoid, minimize, and mitigate for potential impacts to bighorn sheep designated Critical Habitat. These That portion of the Travertine project located outside the Conservation Area is considered a "Covered Activity" according to Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). As a Covered Activity, this area can be developed but is subject to the avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures for the project agreed to between Travertine Corporation and BOR in consultation with the Service (Letter from Bill Havert, Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy, consultant to CVAG, to Steven W. DeLateur, attorney for Travertine CnrlK)rrition, dated 24 July 2003). 2 Approximately 6 acres will be required for the development of the two water reservoirs in Section 5. Following a telephone conference call between S. DeLateur, attorney for Travertine Corporation, and J. Gacey, BOR, it was ruled that this level of impact would be insignificant and it would not be necessary to subtract the acreage from the identified as Conservation Area. a measures include: (1) reduce or eliminate trails into adjacent bighorn sheep habitat; (2) minimize anthropocentric intrusion into bighorn sheep habitat; (3) acquire land in Section 5 for use as a buffer; (4) minimize human access into Section 5 and the Martinez Rock Slide area; (5) contribute to an endowment to assist in the long-term management of bighorn sheep, possibly including watering holes, trail monitors, radio collars, and development and enforcement of rules for hikers; and (6) incorporate appropriate design mitigation for the water reservoirs. 7.2.3.1 Conservation Measures Following several meetings in 2002 and 2003 with the Service and CDFG, the development plan was extensively modified and reconfigured to remove development in bighorn sheep habitat from the southern portion of the Travertine property, specifically in Sections 4 and 5 in the vicinity of the Martinez Rockslide. Based on these discussions, the project boundary was established on May 1, 2003, during a field visit with Travertine, the Service, and CDFG, which was depicted in the draft Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, dated October 15, 2004 (CVMSHCP). Subsequent meetings with the Service in 2005 refined the project boundary to encompass approximately 170 acres of conserved habitat within Travertine's original land holdings (Figure 1). This area to be conserved as bighorn sheep habitat lies in the southern portion of the project site adjacent to the Martinez Rockslide and would be preserved in perpetuity through a deed restriction consistent with California Civil Code Section 815, et seq., as approved by the Service, prior to recording the first final map for the project. The only project -related development within this area of conserved habitat would be the two water reservoirs located in Section 5, and associated access roads, which would encompass about 6 acres. Both reservoirs will be depressed and screened to the greatest extent possible. Any above -ground tank appurtenances will be painted with non -reflective paint colored to blend with the surrounding habitat. These conserved lands would become part of the habitat reserve system proposed by the CVMSHCP, if that plan is adopted. In addition to the lands subject to Specific Plan 94-026, Travertine has acquired 35 acres additional acres in Section 5, of which 14.4 acres would be used for the proposed golf course and about 19.7 acres would be permanently protected as bighorn sheep habitat. These parcels are strategically located to make development in Section 5 beyond the Travertine ownership more difficult (see the Section 5 Addendum to the Travertine Biological Assessment for more details). Travertine also has committed to acquire an additional approximately 100 acres of bighorn sheep habitat in Section 5 that is strategically located to fragment larger blocks of land into smaller units with significantly reduced development potential (Figure 1). Travertine Corporation proposes a variety of additional conservation measures to avoid and minimize potential impacts to bighorn sheep, based on discussions with the Service, BLM, BOR, and the City. The following measures augment the conservation commitments described in the BA, which may contain more detail in certain instances: 1*1 (1) Relocation of the City's General Plan trails out of the central portions of Sections 5 and 32, to the Rockslide Access Trail along the golf course buffer zone of the Travertine project. The final design and location of the Rockslide Access Trail will be approved by the Service and the City to minimize disturbance to bighorn sheep. if necessary, the southern and/or western boundaries of the trail and golf course alignments will be fenced, as described in Conservation Measure 5 below. Unauthorized trails currently in use on Travertine's property will be closed to minimize impacts to bighorn sheep and replaced with the Rockslide Access Trail described above. Other than this trail, no additional trails would be proposed or allowed as part of the Travertine development. A variety of other measures will be implemented to restrict human access to surrounding hills, including: (a) placement of "no trespass" signs at legally enforceable intervals along the trail and habitat/development interface, with legally enforceable language; (b) development of CC&Rs and educational materials that explain to residents and members the ecology of bighorn sheep and the rules concerning unauthorized hiking into sheep habitat; (c) the strategic location of select golf holes outside (i.e., south) of the Rockslide Access Trail at certain points to serve as passive restraints to inhibit users of the trail from venturing into the canyons situated on east and west sides of the rockslide; and (d) implementation of a program to train golf course marshals and other personnel to monitor and control human access to adjacent hills. (2) Strategic acquisition of land in Section 5. In addition to the lands subject to Specific Plan 94- 026, Travertine has acquired 35 acres in Section 5, of which 14.4 acres would be used for the proposed golf course and 19.7 acres would be permanently protected as bighorn sheep habitat. Due to recent escalation in land values, Travertine accelerated the purchase and acquisition of these lands to make development in Section 5 beyond the Travertine ownership more difficult due to economic, topographic, regulatory, and land planning constraints. Prior to recording the first final map, Travertine also has committed to acquire an additional approximately 100 acres of bighorn sheep habitat in Section 5 that also are strategically located to fragment larger blocks of land into smaller units with reduced development potential. All lands proposed for conservation in Section 5 will be approved by the Service and protected in perpetuity consistent with California Civil Code Section 815, et seq. For more detail, please refer to the Section 5 Addendum to the Travertine Biological Assessment. In addition, if the CVMSHCP is adopted, Travertine has agreed to loan $2 million to CVAG or Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC), as specified at Section 4.3.21 of the CVMSHCP and per separate agreement between the parties. CVAG/CVCC would be obligated per the terms of the CVMSHCP to use the loan to acquire additional bighorn sheep habitat within Section 5, and would guarantee repayment of the $2 million loan without interest to Travertine or its successor if the CVMSHCP is adopted. 01 (3) Establishment of a $500,000 endowment with the Center for Natural Lands Management (CNLM) to be managed by the Service to assist with the long-term management of bighorn sheep. Of this total, $100,000 will be provided upon issuance of the first grading permit on the Travertine site with the balance of $400,000 paid in installments of $100,000 per year over the next four years. (4) Provision of an additional $100,000 to the CNLM endowment above to support the gathering of information on the effects of the regional trails system on bighorn sheep, including trails in and around the Travertine development. (5) Because fences could block wildlife movement, fences will not be used as an initial deterrent to unauthorized access; however, a fencing contingency plan is needed to address potential indirect effects of the project. To avoid complications with the installation of any future fence, Travertine will (1) provide appropriate wildlife fence easements that will be located at the exterior boundary of either the golf course or the trail corridor, whichever is the outer most perimeter of the project; (2) create a Home Owners Association (HOA) as the legally responsible party for such installation; and (3) provide or identify a dedicated source of funds to construct the fence, all to be completed prior to recording the first final map. Following formation of the HOA and prior to completion of the habitat interface golf course, Travertine Corporation will establish and convene a three-person committee consisting of a representative from the HOA, the Service, and CDFG, which will be charged with the responsibility to assess the need for a buffer fence between the development and adjoining habitat to keep bighorn sheep off the project site and control human access to sheep habitat. Based on these two criteria, the committee will cooperate in good faith in determining a need for the fence, and agreeing on its design and specific location. The committee members shall have access to the habitat -urban interface areas on the project site to monitor sheep activity through various means, including interviews with residents and staff, and the use/collection of any scientific information. If available information suggests that either of the above two criteria has been met, the committee may decide to conduct further studies on the extent of the problem, funded by the HOA, before voting on whether to require the HOA to construct an 8 -foot fence (or functional equivalent) between the development and the adjoining habitat. Though the Service may decide in its sole discretion whether a fence is required, it will not require construction of a fence without evidence that either of the above criteria have occurred. Prior to construction of any fence, the committee shall coordinate and solicit views on fence design issues with local interests and only approve a given design after a meeting with residents of the Travertine project. The committee shall exist for ten years from the date of creation of the HOA, but the committee may be extended indefinitely if recommended by any of the committee members. Violators of CC&Rs and club rules will be subject to increasingly severe penalties Travertine will consult with the Service during the drafting of the initial set of Rules and Regulations concerning appropriate rules and regulations to protect the bighorn sheep. With Travertine's consent, the Master Declaration of Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions for the entire Travertine project will incorporate certain rules and regulations specifically addressing the W bighorn sheep, which rules and regulations may be modified, amended or deleted only with the express written consent of the Service. (6) The Jefferson Street extension through Section 32 will be constructed using active and passive design features to prevent public roadside parking and foot access into bighorn sheep habitat (e.g., boulders, k -rail, berm, narrow road shoulder, bar ditch, and restrictive signage), subject to review and approval by the Service. (7) Within the project boundary, approximately 100 yards at the west end of the newly constructed Jefferson Street Loop in the southwest corner of Section 33, where it connects with the Avenue 62 alignment, will be left as undeveloped desert. This design feature, in combination with enhanced native landscaping, will discourage unauthorized vehicle access into bighorn sheep habitat in Section 5 adjacent to the Travertine project boundary. (8) The golf course will be designed in a desert -style to minimize loss of native plants and wildlife (compared to conventional golf courses) and reduce potential impediment to movement wildlife movement. The golf course design will use a locally endemic native plant species palette for restoration of any areas that may be disturbed during development. (9) No exotic plants known to be toxic to Peninsular bighorn sheep, or invasive in desert environments, will be used in project landscaping. (10) All internal streets would be separated from the hillsides by golf holes and home sites (i.e., there would be no direct public access from internal streets to hillside sheep habitat). (11) The Martinez Rockslide Access Trail and golf holes will form the southern and western perimeters of the Travertine project. (12) Berms will be located at various points on the golf course to deter bighorn sheep access to the project site. Natural landscaping and berms around residential areas and golf courses would reduce noise, light, and visual impacts on surrounding hills. (13) The best management practices will be used to preclude the establishment of potential disease vectors at open water features (i.e., water bodies will be designed with steep, unvegetated slopes and deep enough water to prevent establishment of emergent wetland vegetation). (14) CC&R's, Specific Plan conditions, and club rules will prohibit activities that emit noise above specified levels (not to exceed 60 dB(A) for sensitive receptors or 75 dB(A) for non- residential receptors (per City Ordinance 9.100.210 Noise Control). For example, Travertine will require that only quiet electric golf carts will be used for service, maintenance, and play. EY: Whenever possible, automobiles, gasoline -powered golf carts, and gasoline -powered leaf - blowers will be prohibited from the completed golf course. (15) Outdoor lighting will be down -shielded and directed away from the hillsides in accordance with the City municipal code. (16) To increase public awareness regarding the sensitivity of Peninsular bighorn sheep in the region, educational materials will be provided to homeowners and made available to users of the public facilities within the Travertine development. This material will be prepared in cooperation with the Service and CDFG. In addition, Travertine will provide within the project an area dedicated as an interpretive center concerning the bighorn sheep. (17) The two water reservoirs will be constructed of steel or concrete and buried underground to the greatest extent possible. Any tank appurtenances (e.g., valves) remaining above -ground will be painted with non -reflective paint colored to blend with the surrounding habitat and to prevent light from being reflected toward sheep habitat in the Santa Rosa Mountains. (18) Dogs and other pets are not allowed within the National Monument and Travertine will install appropriate signage at the designated trailhead parking areas and any other access points to prohibit dogs along the Rockslide Access Trail. Travertine project homeowner CC&Rs and club rules will require pets to remain on a leash while outside enclosed areas, and will prohibit pets from entering the hills at any time. Compliance with the local "leash law" will also be enforced pursuant to City ordinance and the project's Specific Plan conditions. 7.2.3.2 Mitigation Measures. The balance of the mitigation proposed by Travertine Corporation is provided below. 1 _ The Jefferson Street loop through the middle of the development will be a public street as required by the City of La Quinta. However, Travertine proposes to gate all streets running off Jefferson Street for security reasons and to limit unauthorized access into the surrounding hills. 2. The golf course will be designed desert -style to minimize disturbance to native vegetation and reduce or eliminate any potential impediment to the movement of bighorn sheep. 3. The golf course design will utilize a native plant species palette for any areas that may be disturbed during development. 4. No exotic plants known to be toxic will be used in the project's landscaping. 5. All internal streets would be separated from the hillsides by golf holes and home sites (there would be no direct public access from streets to hillside sheep habitat). 6. Berms would be located at various points on the golf course and along the internal streets to deter access to the golf course and hillsides. Natural landscaping and berms M around residential areas and golf courses would reduce noise, light, and visual impacts on surrounding hills. 7. The best techniques and methods would be used to suppress potential disease vectors at open water features. & Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) and club rules would require that pets remain on a leash when outside of an enclosed area and that no pets are allowed into the hills at any time. 9. CC&R's and club rules would prohibit activities that emit noise above specified levels. For example, Travertine has indicated that only quiet electric golf carts will be used for service, maintenance, and play. Automobiles and gasoline -powered golf carts will be prohibited from the completed golf course. 10. No offsite trails are proposed as part of the Travertine development and human access to the project perimeter would be restricted. A variety of measures will be implemented to restrict human access to surrounding hills, including: (a) elimination of any existing trails on Travertine's property to the extent permitted by law; (b) placement of "no access" signs at regular intervals around the perimeter of the property; (c) development of CC&Rs and educational materials that explain to residents and members the ecology of bighorn sheep and the rules concerning unauthorized hiking into sheep habitat, and (d) implementation of a program to train golf course personnel to monitor and control human access to adjacent hills. Because fences could block wildlife movement, fences will not be used as a primary deterrent to unauthorized access; however, a fence contingency plan will be established. Violators of CC&Rs will be subject to increasingly severe penalties. 11. Outdoor lighting will be downshielded and directed away from the hillsides. 12. Wildlife educational material will be posted in the common areas (e.g., golf clubhouse) and at other facilities throughout the project. 13. The water reservoirs will be subterranean to the greatest extent possible. Any exposed surfaces will be treated to prevent light from being reflected toward sheep habitat in the Santa Rosa Mountains. No mitigation is warranted for potential development -related impacts to triple -ribbed milkvetch The three areas delineated by Mr. Andrew Sanders as having either a "low" or "very low" probability of supporting triple -ribbed milkvetch are almost entirely within the 150 -acre Conservation Area in the southern portion of the Travertine property, and Travertine will avoid impacts to the two small areas of potential habitat immediately outside of the Conservation Area to the north. There is an almost non-existent chance that the species would occur elsewhere on the property. No mitigation is warranted for potential development -related impacts to desert tortoise. No live desert tortoise or diagnostic sign was observed on the property or within the zones -of -influence during a focused desert tortoise survey conducted in September 2003 in accordance with recommended Service survey protocol. f� C 7.2.4 State Listed Sensitive Species Mitigation measures are provided on pages 3.8-10 to 3.8-11 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a,). Those measures that pertain to state listed sensitive species are listed below. Subsequent to the identification of these measures, however, Travertine adopted a variety of more rigorous mitigation measures proposed by the Service to reduce potential impacts to bighorn sheep designated Critical Habitat (see Section 7.2.3 Threatened and Endangered Species). These measures, which will be implemented in lieu of the payment of a per acre mitigation fee to CVAG, are summarized in a letter from Bill Havert, Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy (special consultant to CVAG) to Steven W. DeLateur, attorney representing Travertine Corporation, dated 24 July 2003. 1. The City of La Quinta shall ensure, as proposed by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, that mitigation/compensation funds shall be made available to the Coachella Valley multi -species planning process prior to any habitat impacting activities (grading permit), due to this project. Such funds should be calculated on the basis of acreage of habitat disturbed, pursuant to a formula for fees, which is equitably and uniformally applied throughout the Coachella Valley. 2. The applicant shall ensure that individual barrel cactuses, ocotillo, mesquites, acacias, paloverdes and other native trees and plants (i.e., sensitive species: Cove's Cassia, ayenia, and shaggy -haired alumroot) be salvaged from areas to be graded by a biologist and used in landscaping to the extent possible prior to issuance of a grading permit. 3. The applicant shall ensure that the existing Palm Springs Round -tailed Ground Squirrel habitat is protected as a habitat area by a design and maintenance habitat area plan. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, this plan shall be prepared by a biologist and reviewed and approved by CDFG. 4. If applicable, the applicant will obtain a 1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFG for any impact to the on-site blue line streams prior to the issuance of grading permits. This agreement will be accompanied by a mitigation plan and will meet the established requirements of CDFG. 7.2.5 Wastes (Hazardous/Solid) The following remediation/mitigation recommendations would be implemented during development of the property, based on the Phase I ESA conducted by SFC Consultants (SFC 1998): 1. Stained soil should be sampled and analyzed appropriately to determine depth of staining adjacent to the groundwater well motor areas. 2. Stained soil should be sampled and analyzed appropriately to determine depth of staining adjacent to the liquid fertilizer tanks. 89 3. Stained soil caused by on-site dumping of empty chemical containers and debris should be sampled and analyzed appropriately to determine depth of staining. 4. Soil staining associated with inoperable vehicles and farming equipment should be sampled and analyzed appropriately to determine depth of staining. This task may necessitate removal of the vehicles and equipment. Therefore, this task can most cost effectively be done as part of the site preparation for development. 5. Unrecognized environmental conditions associated with the mobile home complex should be addressed prior to demolition and properly disposed of off-site. 6. Surface soils from the former AST location should be sampled and analyzed to determine any residual chemical levels. 7. Surface soils from the vineyard area should be sampled and analyzed to benchmark chemical levels. 8. The eastern boundary adjacent to the mobile home complex should be field verified to confirm on-site versus off-site dumping of sulfur and other miscellaneous garbage and debris. 9. Pole mounted transformers and possible PCB -containing fluids should be addressed and removed by Edison as part of the site preparation for development. 10. Any additional environmental concerns that may not have been outlined above but found during development of the site should be addressed immediately by sampling and appropriate analysis. Subsequent to sampling and analysis as described above, stained soil would be removed and disposed of based on the analytical results. These recommendations are based on the information contained in SFC (1998) only, and are not intended to be all inclusive of the possible remediation that may be necessary on the site. 7.2.6 Water Quality (Surface/Ground) Mitigation measures are provided on pages 3.5-12 to 3.5-13 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a) and listed below. Conditions of Approval with respect to surface drainage are listed in the Travertine Specific Plan of Land Use (The Keith Companies 1999). The project specific impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level based on the measures listed below. 1. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall participate on a fair share basis in CVWD regional water projects to bring needed water facilities to the site and contribute water assessment fees required by CVWD. 2. The applicant shall pay required new development water and sewer fees to the City Finance Department prior to final map approval. 3. The projects shall incorporate interior and exterior water conservation techniques required by the City of La Quinta and recommended by CVWD prior to issuance of building permits: .e a. Low -flush toilets b. Low -flow faucets c. City approval of landscape and irrigation plans. 4. All planned wells, reservoirs, lift stations, and booster -pumping stations shall be designed to CVWD standards and reviewed by both the City and CVWD. The developer shall provide land on which some of these facilities will be located. Identified sites shall be shown on the tract map as lots to be deeded to CVWD prior to final map approval. 5. All proposed wells shall be located a minimum of 1,000 feet away from each other and existing wells to minimize drawdowns from on or off the site wells. Well design and locations shall be reviewed and approved by CVWD and the City prior to acceptance of facilities. 6. The project wastewater system shall be designed to accommodate future on-site uses of reclaimed water for irrigation at build -out of the City. The Engineering/Public Works Department shall review and approve the wastewater system prior to final map approval. 7. The developer shall prepare a landscaping plan consistent with the City Ordinance addressing water -efficient landscaping. Said landscaping plan shall require 50% of landscaping to be of drought -tolerant landscaping materials. The Community Development Department shall review and approve the landscaping plan prior to issuance of building permits. 8. Plumbing fixtures, including shower heads, toilets, urinals, lavatory faucets, sink faucets and tub spout diverts within the developments shall conform to all applicable city and state statute and codes regarding water conservation. The Building and Safety Department shall review and approve all developments to ensure that they comply with all applicable codes prior to issuance of occupancy permits. 9. Final Site design shall be prepared in concert with the City of La Quinta and CVWD to implement strategies to supplement the amount of recharge to the underground aquifer through the use of site design techniques and the utilization of tertiary treated wastewater and/or lower quality potable water, where applicable. The Engineering/Public Works Department and Coachella Valley Water District shall review and approve the final site design for its use of recharge techniques and tertiary treated water. 7.2.7 Visual Resource Management Mitigation measures, which are listed below, are provided on pages 3.9-12 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a) and on pages III -11 to III -15 of the Travertine Specific Plan of Land Use (The Keith Companies 1999) 1. A street lighting plan depicting all exterior lighting shall be prepared according to the Outdoor Lighting Code 9.210, Dark Sky Ordinance and City standards. Street lighting standards shall be incorporated into the plan, which direct light downward. Lighting shall not travel outside property boundaries. Prior to issuance of grading permits, this plan 1�9Z shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development and Engineering/Public Works Departments. 2. Buildings shall emphasize the minimization of glare by incorporating non -reflective building materials to the extent feasible. Building site plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department to assure this measure is met prior to issuance of building permits. The proposed Specific Plan would increase the amount of light and glare in the area and decrease the open space views available to the public. However, implementation of the above mitigation measures would reduce project specific aesthetic and light and glare impacts to a large extent. 7.2.8 Land Use To resolve inconsistencies with the existing City of La Quinta General Plan and zoning map designations, amendments, as requested, shall be made to the City of La Quinta Zoning Map and General Plan Land Use Map prior to final map approval. 7.2.9 Noise Mitigation measures are provided on pages 3.3-15 to 3.3-16 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a) and listed below. Implementation of these measures will reduce noise related impacts of the Travertine Specific Plan to a less than significant level (also see mitigation measure #9 in Section 7.2.3, Threatened and Endangered Species). 1. Construction activities on-site should take place only during the days and hours specified by City Ordinance to reduce noise impacts during more sensitive time periods. 2. All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, should be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers. 3. Stationary equipment should be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from noise sensitive receivers during construction activities. 4. With the issuance of building permits, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas should be located as far as practical from noise sensitive receptors during construction activities. 5. With the issuance of building permits, every effort should be made to create the greatest distance between noise sources and sensitive receptors during construction activities. The Community Development Department shall review the building setbacks and pad elevation prior to the issuance of grading permits. 6. Building setbacks and pad elevations shall be used in conjunction with acoustic berm or berm and barrier combinations to reduce intrusive noise levels at any residential units located within the 60 CNEL contour adjacent to Jefferson Street (and/or Madison Street for the Travertine project). 92 7. Residential development located adjacent to Jefferson Street shall be carefully designed and evaluated at more detailed levels of planning to ensure that adequate noise mitigation is included to meet City noise standards. The Community Development and Engineering/Public Works Department will review the plans to ensure the incorporation of noise mitigation prior to issuance of grading permits. 8. Building setbacks can be used effectively to ensure that all hotel outdoor living areas are located outside the ultimate unattenuated 60 CNEL contours of adjacent roadways. The Building and Safety and Community Development Departments will review the site plan for building setbacks and noise requirements prior to issuance of grading permits. 9. Truck access, parking area design and air conditioning refrigeration units should be carefully designed and evaluated at more detailed levels of planning to minimize the potential for acoustic impacts to adjacent noise sensitive development. These will be reviewed by the Engineering/Public Works and Community Development Departments prior to issuance of grading permits. 7.2.10 Geology/Soils Mitigation measures are provided on pages 3.6-9 to 3.6-10 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a) and listed below. Soils and Erosion 1, The applicant shall ensure that the loss of soils through erosion shall be minimized through conservation of native vegetation, use of permeable ground materials and careful regulation of grading practices. These measures shall be incorporated into a landscape plan to be approved and monitored by the Community Development Department prior to final map approval. 2. The applicant shall ensure that the soils of newly graded slopes be protected (i.e., irrigation, straw, wood chips, visqueen) to limit erosion by wind and water. These erosion prevention measures will be approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading permits. 3. Prior to any construction operation, the applicant shall ensure that areas to be graded be cleaned of vegetation and other deleterious materials in conformance with "Standard Grading Specifications". This will be reviewed and approved by the Engineering/Public Works Department prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant or future developer shall have a geotechnical investigation report prepared for the project site and submitted to the Engineering/Public Works Department. Mitigation measures that are identified in this geotechnical report shall be incorporated into the project. Seismic/Slope Stability 93 1. The applicant shall investigate and submit to the Building and Safety Department prior to the final map approval, the potential for adjusting site design standards to higher levels than is required by the Uniform Building Code (UBC) for residential, resort/hotel and commercial uses. 2. The applicant shall ensure that preliminary slope stability investigations be completed as part of the initial geotechnical investigation prior to the commencement of grading on-site. Such investigations shall identify potential slope failure and/or rockfall hazard areas, and shall identify the specific measures (e.g., barriers) to reduce hazards and protect project development to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety and Engineering/Public Works Departments. 3. If slopes exceed ten feet, engineering calculations shall be performed to substantiate the stability of slopes steeper than 2 to 1. Fill slopes shall be overfilled and trimmed back to competent material. This will be reviewed and approved by the Engineering/Public Works Department prior to issuance of grading permits. 7.2.11 Recreation Mitigation measures are provided on page 3.11-6 of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report (The Keith Companies 1995a) and listed below. 1. In accordance with Policy 5.2-1 of the City's Park and Recreation Element, the applicant will provide in lieu fees to the City's Finance Department. Prior to tentative tract map approval, the applicant shall consult with the Park and Recreation Department to determine final parkland mitigation. 7.2.12 Traffic and Circulation The following mitigation measures were identified in the 1995 Travertine Specific Plan. 1. The proposed internal circulation layout shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineering and Public Warks and Community Development Department during the development review process to ensure compliance with City access and design standards. 2. During the site plan check, the City's Building and Safety and Engineering/Public Works Departments shall ensure that clear unobstructed sight distances have been provided at all intersections proposed onsite. 3. Prior to final tract map approval, stop signs shall be installed at all unsignalized site egress points to control existing traffic. 4. During the Specific Plan map check, the City Engineering/Public Works Department shall ensure that Jefferson Street is constructed to its master planned secondary arterial cross-section in conjunction with adjacent development on-site. 94 5. To accommodate early development of the Travertine Specific Plan, the project area may be served by paved two-lane streets via the Jefferson Street alignment and the Madison Street alignment, thereby creating a complete loop for transportation access. The Jefferson Street pavement from Avenue 58 to Madison Street at Avenue 62 will be installed in the alignment adopted by the City. In addition to new pavement on Madison Street between Avenue 60 and Avenue 62, the existing pavement segment between Avenue 58 and Avenue 60 will be overlaid to accommodate the increased traffic loading. This alternative can serve the Travertine development until 50% of the residential development or until the hotel is constructed, whichever occurs first. Thereafter, the remaining complement of street improvements will be installed. 6. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits for the final phase of the Specific Plan at buildout, the Travertine project proponent should contribute its fair share to an all- weather access connecting the southern loop of Jefferson Street to Madison Street at Avenue 60 and overlay the existing Madison Street pavement between Avenue 58 and Avenue 60 to accommodate the increased traffic loading. The fair contribution shall be deposited with the City's Finance Department. 7. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant will coordinate with Sunline Transit Agency regarding the appropriate placement of support facilities for the public transportation system. 8. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant will contribute on a fair share basis to the cost of area -wide improvements by participating in the City of La Quinta Infrastructure Fee program, which includes traffic signalization. 9. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant will show to the City that adequate off street parking has been provided, according to the minimum parking requirements of the zoning ordinance. 10. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan will be prepared in accordance with the City of La Quinta's Transportation Demand Management Ordinance. Elements that should be considered include: a. Transit stop locations and bus turnouts; b. Transit stops with convenient and safe street crossings; and C. Construction of shelters on-site for pedestrians and bus riders. 7.3 RESIDUAL IMPACTS 7.3.1 Air Quality South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) significance thresholds for NOx and PM,owill be exceeded during the construction phase of the Travertine project. 7.3.2 Threatened and Endangered Species 95 Project residual impacts would be mitigated to less than a significant level. 7.3.3 State Listed Sensitive Species Though mitigation will reduce the level of impact, the project would result in the permanent and unavoidable removal of some sensitive plants 7.3.4 Water Quality (Surface/Ground) Project residual impacts would be mitigated to less than a significant level. 7.3.5 Noise Implementation of mitigation measures will reduce noise -related residual impacts to a less than significant level. 7.3.6 Geology/Soils Implementation of mitigation measures will reduce residual impacts to geology/soils to a less than significant level. 7.3.7 Recreation Implementation of mitigation measures will reduce recreation residual impacts to a less than significant level. 7.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 7.4.1 Air Quality -f • - The Travertine development, in conjunction with other similar projects in the area, will result in cumulative air quality impacts. 7.4.2 Threatened and Endangered Species There are no known state, tribal, local, or private activities that are reasonably certain to occur within occupied Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat at higher elevations in the Santa Rosa Mountains. According to Krausman et al. (2002), future threats of encroachment into the southern Santa Rosa Mountains are very limited and the future adoption of the CVMSHCP will help ensure that remaining occupied habitat is protected. Although further development is considered likely at lower elevations along the urban fringe, it is unlikely, as noted above, that r. these areas are of value to Peninsular bighorn sheep. However, virtually any future project with significant impacts in this area would be subject to consultation under Section 7 of the ( Endangered Species Act. The Draft Economic Analysis of designated Critical Habitat for Peninsular Bighorn Sheep (Industrial Economics, Inc. 2000) concludes the following with { respect to potential future development in bighorn sheep Critical Habitat: There exists a significant number of regulations and management plans that affect activities within Critical Habitat; and Most of the lands designated as Critical Habitat are in remote mountainous locations and do not support significant economic activity. The triple -ribbed milkvetch occurs in locations where there are few, if any, human -caused threats (CVMSHCP 2003). Most of the known locations (85 percent) occur on existing conservation lands in protected status, including those in Mission Creek on land owned by BLM or the Wildlands Conservancy, in Big Morongo Canyon on BLM land, or in Whitewater Canyon on BLM land. Therefore, virtually any future project with impacts within the known range of this species would be subject to consultation under Section 7 of the ESA. Also, we are not aware of any State, tribal, local, or private activities that are reasonably certain to occur near the action area of this project and that are likely to affect triple -ribbed milkvetch. Despite the fact that the general project area historically supported a low desert tortoise density, virtually any future project with impacts in the vicinity of the Travertine project would be subject to Section 7 consultation. 7.4.3 State Listed Sensitive Species The project would contribute to the cumulative, incremental loss of Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub and Desert Dry Woodland habitats in the Coachella Valley. 7.4.4 Water Quality (Surface/Ground) Cumulative water impacts within the Coachella Valley would occur due to the dry climate and increased dependency on imported water. 7.4.5 Visual Resource Management Development of the Travertine project along with other recreational/residential developments in the area will represent a negative cumulative effect on visual resources. 97 7.4.6 Noise Development of the Travertine project along with other recreational/residential developments in the area will result in a cumulative increase in noise levels in the area. Table 10 presents the General Plan build -out motor vehicle noise levels in the vicinity. The Travertine Specific Plan is projected to be completely built and occupied upon General Plan build -out (Post 2010). An estimate of the distribution of the Travertine Specific Plan traffic was identified as potentially audible project -related noise impacts along several roadway links in the project vicinity. The three roadway links, which are currently unimproved but will serve as the Travertine Specific Plan primary access (Avenue 62 east and west of Madison Street, Madison Street between Avenue 60 and Avenue 62, and Jefferson Street between Avenue 58 and where Jefferson Street connects with Travertine) will experience audible noise increases (> 3 dBA). Madison Street will be the primary access route, and the addition of the Travertine Specific Plan traffic will result in potentially audible, (more than 1 dBA but less than 3 dBA) and in one instance clearly audible, noise increases along Madison Street from the project site to Avenue 52. Table 10. General Plan Buildout Exterior Noise Exposure Adjacent to Nearby Roadways Roadway A.D.T.a CNEL@ Distance to Contours (Ft.)` (Veh/Day) 100 Feetb 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA Jefferson Street -North of Avenue 50 -North of Avenue 52 -North of Avenue 54 Madison Street -North of Avenue 50 -North of Avenue 52 -North of Avenue 54 -North of Airport Blvd. -North of Avenue 58 -North of Avenue 60 -North of Avenue 62 -South of Avenue 62 Avenue 62 -West of Madison Street -West of Monroe Street -East of Monroe Street 55,000 75.6 337 1058 3344 56,640 75.7 R/W 159 503 56,420 66.7 R/W 147 466 29,830 71.8 148 462 1458 38,400 72.9 190 594 1878 20,270 70.2 104 320 1009 30,970 72.0 155 483 1526 23,820 70.9 121 376 1185 36,160 72.7 181 568 1793 11,770 67.8 64 185 581 4,510 62.6 R/W 59 180 17,960 68.6 73 226 713 9,710 65.9 R/W 122 383 7,020 64.5 R/W 89 278 a. A.D.T. means average daily two-way traffic volume for post 2010 + project conditions. b. Values are at 100 feet from roadway centerlines. C. All distances are measured from the centerline. R/W means the contour falls within the right -of way. •.* Ultimate, on-site noise levels adjacent to master planned roadways are required to ensure that appropriate noise mitigation is incorporated into the project design. Ultimately traffic conditions were analyzed to identify any potential noise conflicts with the proposed land uses on the project site. Table 11 provides design noise levels from master planned roadways adjacent to the project site based on the City of La Quinta General Plan. As shown therein, noise levels along surface roadways adjacent to the project site may be as high as 74.8 CNEL along Madison Street (primary arterial) or as high as 73.2 CNEL along Jefferson Street (secondary arterial). Although the General Plan build -out projections for the project vicinity are less than the design capacity of the roadways, there is the potential for changes in the General Plan land use and increases in traffic beyond General Plan build -out. Therefore, the design capacities of the roadways were utilized as a "worst case" assumption in the development of Table 11. The noise levels and contours in Table 11 assume unmitigated conditions without noise reductions from ground absorption. Construction of residential areas would only be allowed if the exterior and interior noise environment were mitigated to meet the noise standards in the General Plan and demonstrated through a noise study. Table 11. Design Noise Levels Adjacent to Master Planned Roadways Roadway A.D.T.a CNEL @ CNEL @ Distance to Contours (Ft.)� (Veh/Day) Rmb 100 Feet 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA Primary Arterial 30,000 74.8 71.8 149 465 1470 Secondary Arterial 26,000 73.2 70.3 107 330 1040 a. A.D.T. represents average daily two-way traffic volume for the design capacity. b. Values are at 100 feet from roadway centerlines. C. All distances are measured from the centerline. 7.4.7 Land Use The Travertine project, in conjunction with other recreational/residential developments in the area, would result in the cumulative loss of open space to urban uses. This is an unavoidable impact. r 8.0 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT CONSIDERATIONS Public comments submitted for this Environmental Assessment, including names and street addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the Palm Springs -South Coast Field Office during regular business hours (7:45 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.), Monday through Friday, except holidays. Individual respondents may request confidentiality. If you wish to withhold your name or address from public review or from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. Such requests will be honored to the extent allowed by law. All submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for public inspection in their entirety. Bureau of Land Management Palm Springs Office P.O. Box 581260 690 West Garnet Avenue Palm Springs, CA 92258 (760) 251-4800 100 9.0 PERSONS/AGENCIES CONSULTED In addition to the participation of BLM, BOR, the Service, SWCA Environmental Consultants, and Gould & Associates Energy & Environmental Consulting, Inc., the following agencies and { individuals were consulted in the preparation of this EA. l f t Name Title Affiliation Richard Milanovich Chairman Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians ( Richard Begay THPO John James Chairman Judy Stapp Cultural Resources Cabazon Band of Mission Indians ( Coordinator Maurice Lyons Chairman Britt Wilson Cultural Resources Morongo Band of Mission Indians Coordinator MaryAnn Green Chairperson Ken Doran Cultural Resources Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians i Coordinator John Marcus Chairman t Terry Hughes Tribal Administrator Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians Katherine Saubel Spokesperson t Raymond Torres Tribal Administrator Los Coyotes Band of Indians Joe Loya Environmental Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians Coordinator Ben Scoville Planner William Contreras Tribal Cultural Resources �. Coordinator Manuel Hamilton Chairperson Anthony Largo Environmental Ramona Band of Mission Indians Coordinator ( Robert Salgado Sr. Chairperson Harold Arres Soboba Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resource Jerome Salgado Sr. Manager t Chairperson 4 Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians Elio Torrealba Air Quality Inspector South Coast Air Quality Management District Dan Ruiz Managing Principal Stantec Consulting, Inc. r Jon Avery U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Pete Sorenson U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 101 Therese O'Rourke U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Name Title Affiliation /r•nn+'rl 1 Doug Evans Director of Community City of La Quinta Development Steven W. DeLateur Attorney at Law McDermott & DeLateur, LLP Jim A. Hildenbrand Director Land Acquisition/ Hofmann Land Development Co_ Project Sales PREPARED BY: Claude Kirby April , 2006 U.S. Bureau of Land Management Kenneth Kertell September 5, 2005 SWCA Environmental Consultants Date Kim C. Gould April 7_2006 Gould & Associates Energy & Environmental Consulting, Inc. Steven W. DeLateur April 7, 2006 McDermott & DeLateur, LLP APPROVED BY: U.S. Bureau of Land Management Signature: _ Name: Title: Date: 102 10.0 LITERATURE CITED Air Quality Management District (AQMD). 2003. Dust control in the Coachella Valley: a comprehensive guide for plan reviewers, developers, contractors, and code enforcement staff. Bean, Lowell John. 1978. Cahuilla. In Handbook of North American Indians: Volume 8, California, Robert F. Heizer (editor), pp. 575-587. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. Environmental Audit, Inc. 2001. Travertine Project: construction air emissions calculations. Prepared for Jackson, DeMarco & Peckenpaugh, Irvine, California. Glenn Lukos Associates. 2001. Jurisdictional delineation for the Travertine property, Riverside County, California. Prepared for Travertine Corporation, Indian Wells, California. Giroux & Associates Environmental Consultants. 2001. Noise impact analysis: Madison Street (Travertine) extension project, City of La Quinta, California. Prepared for Jackson, DeMarco & Peckenpaugh, Irvine, California. McDermott & DeLateur. 2005, with Gould & Associates Energy & Environmental Consulting, Inc., Section 5 Addendum to the Biological Assessment of impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep, desert tortoise, and triple -ribbed milkvetch from the proposed Travertine development, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. Prepared for Travertine Corporation, Indian Wells, California. Moratto, Michael J. 1984. California Archaeology. New York: Academic Press. Paul Chace & Associates. 2001. A cultural resources survey for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation of the Madison Street alignment project, City of La Quinta. Prepared for Travertine Corporation, Indian Wells, California. SFC Consultants (SFC). 1998. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for Travertine Property, Approximately 909 Acres, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. Prepared by SFC Consultants, Mission Viejo, California for Travertine Park, L.L.C., Beverly Hills, California. Stantec Consulting, Inc. 2005-2006. Street designs, plans, and engineering for Madison & Jefferson Streets prepared for Travertine Corporation, Indian Wells, California. SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA). 2004. Biological assessment of impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep, desert tortoise, and triple -ribbed milkvetch from the proposed Travertine development, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. Prepared for Travertine Corporation, Indian Wells, California. Tettemer and Associates. 2002. Hydrology, hydraulics and drainage concept study for Madison Street Improvement Project, La Quinta, Riverside County, California. Prepared for Travertine Corporation, Indian Wells, California. The Keith Companies. 1994. A cultural resources survey for the Travertine Point Project, City of La Quinta. Prepared for Travertine Corporation, Palm Desert, California. 103 The Keith Companies. 1995a. Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Environmental Impact Report. Prepared for the City of La Quinta, California. The Keith Companies. 1995b. Travertine and Green Specific Plan — Technical Appendices, Environmental Impact Report. Prepared for the City of La Quinta, California. The Keith Companies. 1999. Travertine Specific Plan No. 94-026, Specific Plan of Land Use. Prepared for the City of La Quinta, California. U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1980. California Desert Conservation Area Plan. U.S. Department of the Interior. U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1986. Manual Handbook H-8410-1 — Visual Resource Inventory. Washington, D.C. U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2002a. Proposed California Desert Conservation Area Plan Amendment for the Coachella Valley and Final Environmental Impacts Statement. Volume 1. Prepared by BLM, California Desert District, Palm Springs -South Coast Field Office. U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2002b. Proposed California Desert Conservation Area Plan Amendment for the Coachella Valley and Final Environmental Impacts Statement. Volume 2, APPENDICES. Prepared by BLM, California Desert District, Palm Springs -South Coast Field Office. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 2005. Endangered Species Consultation on the Proposed Travertine Project, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, Ca. Biological Opinion #FWS-ERIV-2735.3, prepared by the Service, Ecological Services Division, Carlsbad Field Office, California. Warren, Claude. 1984. The Desert Region. In California Archaeology, Michael J. Moratto (author). New York: Academic Press. 104 ADDENDUM Section 5 Addenduin to Travertine Biological Assessment Travertine is acquiring selected parcels in Section 5 for PBS mitigation, at a cost of $2 million ("PBS Mitigation Land"). The purpose of these land acquisitions is to provide additional open space in perpetuity along the slopes west of Travertine leading into the Santa Rosa Mountains. The PBS Mitigation Land acquisitions are being made pursuant to a set of PBS conservation measures previously negotiated with the Service. (Please see the Biological Assessment from BLM to the Service dated June 24, 2004, and the updated Project Description dated September 2005.) In view of the rapidly escalating price of land in the Coachella Valley, including land in Section 5, Travertine has volunteered to accelerate the PBS Mitigation Land acquisitions at the present time in order to be able to purchase more acres for the same amount of money, rather than waiting until Travertine obtains its first grading permit as was originally agreed upon between Travertine and the Service. In addition to the PBS Mitigation Land acquisitions, Travertine owns, has taken under contract, and is currently negotiating the acquisition of additional parcels in Section 5 ("Open Space Parcels"). Travertine has an important interest in seeing that the hillsides in Section 5 remain as open space so that the views from Travertine towards the Santa Rosa Mountains retain their pristine character. To that end, Travertine is investing a substantial sum of money above and beyond the $2 million PBS mitigation amount to acquire strategically selected parcels in Section 5. The acreage acquired in Section 5, over and above the $2 million PBS amount, will be credited toward Travertine's development in Sections 4 and 5, in consultation with the Service. (Travertine's approved Specific Plan provides for up to 2,300 dwelling units. However, Travertine anticipates developing only up to 2,000 dwelling units. See Project Description dated September 2005, in the project's Biological Assessment.) Travertine's Section 5 land acquisitions are designed to make it more difficult for a third party to assemble enough acreage over which to amortize and, thus, justify the significant development costs in Section 5. In addition, other than condemnation by the City, Travertine will not sell or otherwise provide additional right-of-way width across its property that would allow developments within Section 5 to meet the City's access road width requirements. Thus, development of Section 5 would be extremely difficult given the challenging topography, the necessary infrastructure improvements, and the existing local, state, and federal regulations pertaining to Section 5. The existing multi -layered set of regulations of federal, state, and local agencies would lead to the involvement of BLM and/or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ("USACE") in most cases, which, in turn, would elicit a federal nexus likely requiring another Section 7 consultation. The resulting time and expense in processing the various permit applications, satisfying the Agencies' requirements, providing infrastructures, and paying for the anticipated agency -required mitigation measures would likely make development in Section 5 uneconomical for all but the largest of projects. However, Travertine's strategic land acquisitions in Trav/A1136-18aAdditionstoSection5Add091305 Section 5 make a large assemblage of developable land in Section 5 economically and logistically infeasible, and, therefore, highly unlikely. The interplay among these various factors is analyzed as follows: 1. Existing Topographic Conditions. a. Much of the western, central and southern portions of Section 5 contain slopes of 20% or more. As such, those portions of Section 5 fall within the City of La Quinta's Hillside Conservation Overlay District Regulations (the "Hillside Regulations"). The Hillside Regulations permit only one dwelling unit per ten acres, unless the applicant demonstrates compliance with a myriad of very stringent land planning, environmental, and design criteria. (For details, see below, 2., Existing Regulatory Conditions.) b. Much of Section 5 is laced with severe drainage washes created by the storm water that flows off the surrounding Santa Rosa Mountains. These washes would need to be diverted, culverted, or bridged in order to build access roads to, and to develop the various parcels within Section 5. Water diversion barriers and/or storm water retention basins would likely need to be constructed to prevent future storm flows from destroying the roads and the improvements to most of those parcels. Moreover, current City regulations, La Quinta Municipal Code 8.70.100(B)(3),require the retention of all storm water on-site, regardless of whether the parcel is within a City Hillside Overlay area. Furthermore, filling in streambeds would trigger the jurisdiction of California Department of Fish and Game ("CDFG") and possibly USACE. (For details, see below, 2., Existing Regulatory Conditions.) 2. Existing Regulatory Conditions. a. City of La Quinta i. Zoning for Section 5 is two to four dwelling units per acre, except for land covered by the Hillside Regulations (La Quinta Municipal Code 9.140.040: HC Hillside Conservation Regulations). Hillsides are defined as slopes of 20% or greater, and density in those areas is limited to one dwelling unit per ten acres. ii. The Avenue 62 alignment along the northern boundary of Section 5 ("Avenue 62 Extended") is not a General Plan street. A public right-of-way easement exists 30 feet on either side of the section line between Section 5 and Section 32. City ordinances mandate that the subdivision of land requires the dedication of street widths Trav/A1136-18aAdditionstoSection5Add091305 2 C' iii. Moreover, given the natural resource sensitivities present in Section 5, it is highly likely that the applicant would have to prepare an environmental impact report (`BIR"). The EIR studies and discloses all of the anticipated environmental effects of developing in Section 5, as required of the lead agency, City of La Quinta, under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; Ca. Public Resources Code, Division 13 Environmental Protection, Section 21000; website: http://ceres.ca.gov/topic/env_law/cega/stat/). The EIR would then need to be circulated for public review and comment. The City eventually holds a public hearing to receive and consider comments from members of the public, including adjacent landowners such as Travertine, and to vote on whether to accept or reject the EIR or to send the EIR back to the developer for further study. Travertine will consider any proposed development in Section 5 to have significant adverse impacts, would object to such, and request that the City require an EIR on the proposed Section 5 development. The City may also condition the project with reasonable mitigation measures designed to lessen or eliminate the anticipated detrimental effects of the project. Depending on the complexity of the issues involved with the property, EIR processing may take one to two years to complete at a cost of $100,000 to $200,000 or more. iv. Moreover, City ordinances require applicants for permits to improve real property to retain all storm water on-site (La Quinta Municipal Code 13.24.120 Drainage). Due to its steep topography, for Section 5 development, this means that even a developer of just one dwelling unit would have to design, build, and maintain storm Trav/A1136-18aAdditionstoSection5Add091305 3 conforming to the City street code. A subdivision would typically C require a main access street as a collector street (74 feet wide) or a C secondary arterial (88 feet wide) (La Quinta Municipal Code 13.24.070 Street Design—Generally, & Table 13.24.060). C. However, since Avenue 62 Extended is not a General Plan street, the City of La Quinta typically would not use eminent domain to condemn private property in Section 5 to provide a developer of Section 5 with a right-of-way wide enough to meet City codes. Therefore, assuming a developer could not obtain additional right- of-way within Section 5, such a developer would likely be required to seek additional road access right-of-way in Section 32 and E initiate a right of way grant application with Bureau of Land { Management, the federal agency responsible for administering Section 32 (federal land). iii. Moreover, given the natural resource sensitivities present in Section 5, it is highly likely that the applicant would have to prepare an environmental impact report (`BIR"). The EIR studies and discloses all of the anticipated environmental effects of developing in Section 5, as required of the lead agency, City of La Quinta, under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; Ca. Public Resources Code, Division 13 Environmental Protection, Section 21000; website: http://ceres.ca.gov/topic/env_law/cega/stat/). The EIR would then need to be circulated for public review and comment. The City eventually holds a public hearing to receive and consider comments from members of the public, including adjacent landowners such as Travertine, and to vote on whether to accept or reject the EIR or to send the EIR back to the developer for further study. Travertine will consider any proposed development in Section 5 to have significant adverse impacts, would object to such, and request that the City require an EIR on the proposed Section 5 development. The City may also condition the project with reasonable mitigation measures designed to lessen or eliminate the anticipated detrimental effects of the project. Depending on the complexity of the issues involved with the property, EIR processing may take one to two years to complete at a cost of $100,000 to $200,000 or more. iv. Moreover, City ordinances require applicants for permits to improve real property to retain all storm water on-site (La Quinta Municipal Code 13.24.120 Drainage). Due to its steep topography, for Section 5 development, this means that even a developer of just one dwelling unit would have to design, build, and maintain storm Trav/A1136-18aAdditionstoSection5Add091305 3 water retention facilities on-site for runoff from all impervious surfaces. Given the steep slopes of Section 5, fully retaining such storm water on-site will, if possible at all, be challenging and expensive to engineer, construct, and maintain in perpetuity. b. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service i. All of Sections 5 and 32 are included within the boundauy of Service -delineated Essential Habitat per the PBS Recovery Plan (USFWS 2000). Section 32 is also federal land administered by BLM. Therefore, a developer would have to submit a right-of-way (ROW) grant application to BLM for a permit to construct Avenue 62 Extended across the federal land (Section 32) in order to provide road access and allow development in Section 5 (Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 [FLPMA], U.S. Code Title 43, Chapter 35 Federal Land Policy and Management, 43 CFR 1601 and 1610, 2800, and 2880, websites: http://www.blm.gov/121anningfimages/policy framework jpg; or http://www4.law.comell.edu/uscode/html/Uscode43/usc--sgp 01 4 3 10 35.html; and BLM's Land Use Planning Handbook (H-1601- 1). This ROW grant creates the federal regulatory nexus and is the "federal action" by which BLM would be required to consult with the Service on the proposed development in Section 5 and ROW, under Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; website: http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa.html). (See also section c., below, Bureau of Land Management.) ii. In addition, the applicant, on behalf of BLM, must also prepare a biological assessment (BA) or biological evaluation (BE) of project impacts to the satisfaction of BLM and the Service, depending on whether the project constitutes a "major federal action". This biological assessment is used by the Service as the basis for the Service's eventual issuance of a biological opinion per BLM's Section 7 consultation request. The BA and Section 7 consultation process requires extensive field work, reporting, and meetings with the Service, BLM, other agencies, and the applicant/developer. Due to the staffing and budgetary constraints of the Agencies and the likely complexities of the actions proposed, these consultations typically take several years to complete. iii. If the Section 7 consultation were successful from the developer's standpoint (i.e., with a "no jeopardy" and "no adverse modification" finding), the Service would issue a biological Trav/A1136-18aAdditionstoSection5Add091305 4 opinion. The Service, BLM, and the applicant developer would agree upon a set of conservation measures to protect the PBS and their habitat as a result of the proposed development in Section 5. Typically, a key component of the conservation measures is a significant financial obligation, either in the form of purchases of land or other costs. c. Bureau of Land Management Completion of the Section 7 consultation and BLM's receipt of a biological opinion from the Service satisfies BLM's regulatory action approval duties under the ESA. However, BLM must also comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 40 CFR 1500-1508, and BLM's NEPA Policy Handbook H-1790-1; website: http://www.blm.gov/planning/policy.html). BLM determines what level of NEPA review (Environmental Assessment "EA") or (Environmental Impact Statement "EIS") is required after it completes its analysis of the project and the anticipated environmental effects the project would generate. ii. Typically, BLM requires supplemental studies in addition to the studies already performed for the EIR, if BLM determines that the EIR studies do not meet BLM or other federal guidelines or requirements. In some cases, the state and federal documents may be combined into one large, complex document that meets both state and federal requirements (e.g., EIRIEA or EIR/EIS). If BLM determines that the project's NEPA documents and right -of way grant application complies with federal law and regulations, BLM issues a final NEPA document (either EA or EIS) and Record of Decision (ROD), and then issues the grant of right-of-way to the applicant. iii. BLM requires applicants to enter into a reimbursement agreement wherein the applicant reimburses BLM for the direct and indirect costs associated with its staff time allocated to the applicant's project application. d. California Department of Fish and Game CDFG has three areas of jurisdiction over Section 5 property: i. Regulating impacts to threatened and endangered species (here, the PBS) under California Endangered Species Act (CDFG Code Trav/A1136-18aAdditionstoSection5Add091305 2080-2081, Regulation 783; website: h ://www.dfi.ca. ov/le al/879re s.htm ; ii. Impacts to lakes and streambeds (CDFG Code 1600-1616, Lake and Streambed Alteration Program; website: http://www.dfg.ca.p,Qy/1.600/1.600code.htmi ; and iii. As a state "responsible agency" during the CEQA EIR process, CDFG would typically assess the adequacy of the EIR and recommend appropriate mitigation measures. CDFG would likely request that the City, as the CEQA EIR "lead agency", condition a project in Section 5 to produce a habitat conservation plan to the satisfaction of CDFG to mitigate the anticipated impacts to PBS and its habitat. Furthermore, since most all development scenarios would affect streambeds (washes), CDFG would also request that the City Council condition a project to obtain a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA) under the CDFG Code 1602. This would entail performing a jurisdictional streambed/wetlands delineation and engaging in consultations with CDFG on ways to avoid, minimize, and mitigate the alteration of the many streambeds in Section 5. Typically, mitigation includes project design feature elements, habitat restoration, and/or purchasing land to offset the streambed acres lost to the development. CDFG's issuance of the 1602 SAA constitutes a CEQA action and could supercede the City's CEQA findings. e. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers If USACE determines that storm water runoff originating in the Santa Rosa Mountains and crossing Section 5 does escape Dike No. 4 through a culvert located at Avenue 64 west of the Dike, USACE will require a Section 5 developer to obtain a Section 404 permit ("404 Permit") under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, as amended, or now commonly called the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344, Section 404), and under USACE's implementing regulations (33 CFR 320-331); website: http://www.usace. army.mil/inet/functions/cw/ceewo/reg/oceover.ht m). It would be practically impossible for anyone to build in Section 5 without resulting in "fill" within USACE jurisdictional waters, thus requiring a 404 Permit for any development there. The process to obtain a 404 Permit includes consulting closely with USACE over the land plan, project impacts, mitigation measures, Trav/A1136-18aAdditionstoSection5Add091305 6 and the retention of storm water within and outside the project. As with an application to BLM for a right-of-way grant, USACE typically requires an ESA Section 7 consultation with the Service. f. Riverside County Fire Marshal For fire safety reasons, the Riverside County Fire Marshal has a policy of requiring two separate ingress and egress points on all- weather surfaces for subdivisions. The decision whether to require them is contingent upon the map application and site conditions. It is unclear whether the Fire Marshal would require two access points for a single dwelling unit in Section 5. However, there is no question that even for a single dwelling unit, the access road to the residence would have to meet the requirements of the Fire Marshal, including all-weather surfaces, minimum road widths, and minimum turning radius (City of La Quinta Municipal Code Chapter 8.08: Fire Code; California Fire Code, 2001 incorporated by reference. Also, Chapter 8.08.070 Fire Apparatus Access Roads). It is even more difficult to envision if, how, or where secondary road access could be developed, given that the only public road easement to Section 5 that does not pass through federal land and/or mountainous terrain is the south 30 feet of the section line along Avenue 62 Extended. Thus, the Fire Marshal requirements alone could make development in Section 5 substantially more difficult. 3. Required Infrastructure Improvements. a. Currently, Section 5 has no road, water, sewer, electric power, gas, or telephone service. Other than the gravel access road located along Avenue 62 and which terminates at the southwestern corner of the Travertine vineyard in Section 33, Section 5 has no road access. Furthermore, Travertine has agreed that the proposed Jefferson Street Loop will be aligned so that there is a minimum of 100 yards of open desert terrain between the western edge of the Loop and the corner of Sections 4, 5, 32 and 33. This open desert terrain includes a significant elevational drop from the end of the existing dirt road down into a major wash. b. Travertine is only conditioned to provide capacity for water, sewer, power, and other dry utilities only as necessary to service its own development and no other project. Furthermore, Travertine will not enter into any future agreements that will add utility capacity for properties not owned by Travertine in Section 5. Thus, except for the partial road access provided by the Jefferson Street Loop, other Section 5 property owners who might Trav/A1136-18aAdditionstoSection5Add091305 7 k wish to develop in Section 5, must obtain the development rights for and construct their own road and utility infrastructure at their own cost. 1 . c. Attached as Exhibit A and Exhibit B are preliminary cost estimates prepared by The Keith Companies. These cost estimates do not include any costs related to development of on-site infrastructure, such as on-site f stormwater retention, water improvements, sewer improvements, off-site f- drainage, hillside grading, fire department -required access, and wildlife and streambed alteration permit requirements, among many others. Exhibit A shows the cost to bring road access and utilities to the first parcel in Section 5 not owned or controlled by Travertine (which is in excess of two miles) to be approximately $8.8 million. Exhibit B shows the cost to bring road access and utilities to a parcel in Section 5 approximately 2,350 feet up the slope (west) into Section 5 to be approximately $11.9 million. d. Assuming, hypothetically, that someone with significant financial resources wanted to build a single family dwelling unit on 10 acres, that party could not save the cost of bringing water and sewer service to its property because CVWD has stated that its policy is to not allow septic tanks and private wells in Section 5 (pers. comm. of Steven W. DeLateur, attorney representing Travertine Corporation, with Tanya Courtner of CVWD, on September 8, 2005). These estimates demonstrate that the cost to build a single dwelling unit per 10 acres in Section 5 per the City's Hillside Regulation, supra, is prohibitively expensive. As elaborated previously herein, targeted parcel acquisitions by Travertine in Section 5 make more difficult the assemblage of large tracts of land necessary to generate enough lots, at a maximum of 4 units per acre (or 1 unit per ten acres for land within the Hillside Overlay District), over which to allocate the enormous cost of bringing infrastructure just to the northern boundary of Section 5. Developers and builders would then have significant additional infrastructure costs to add to these cost estimates in order to bring road access and utilities on-site, and to retain all stormwater on-site. 4. Conclusion. a. Section 5 property owners would face most of the foregoing expenditures to develop dwelling units in Section 5, independently of whether or not Travertine is ever developed. Expenditures of this magnitude require the assemblage of a certain number of acres in order to yield enough lots to amortize the off-site and on-site improvement costs per lot down to a level Trav/A1136-18aAdditionstoSection5Add091305 which will render the lots marketable; i.e., to a cost level acceptable to the residential market. b. However, the impediments presented to prospective developers in Section 5 are compounded because of the difficult terrain and the isolation of Section 5 from existing roads and utility connection points. Further complicating development in Section 5 are the multiple layers of existing regulations as a result of the interrelation of the many governmental agencies having jurisdiction over Section 5. Consequently, the number of lots required to economically justify development in Section 5 will be commensurately higher than it would be without these complicating factors. Trav/A1136-18aAdditionstoSection5Add091305 9 TRAVERTINE TRAVERTINE PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST 6/21/2005 PLEASE NOTE: THIS ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST IS BASED ON INFORMATION AVAILABLE AT THE TIME AND MAY NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS INCURRED. THIS COST ESTIMATE IS BASED ON A CONCEPTUAL LAND USE PLAN DATED MARCH 2, 2005 (REVISED) BY TKC. TKC MAKES NO GUARANTEE AS TO ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS INCURRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. DESCRIPTION I UNIT I QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL AVE, 62 INFRASTRUCTURE STREET APPROX.1,100 L.F. FROM JEFFERSO'N1AVE. 62 WEST INTO SECTION 5 Rough Grade CY 4,500 $ 1.50 $ 6,750.00 Fine Grade Street Area SF 40,000 $ 0.25 $ 10,000.00 4" A.C. over 10" A.B. SF 36,000 $ 3.25 $ 117,000.00 8" Curb & Gutter LF 2,000 $ 18.00 $ 36,000.00 5' Wide Sidewalk SF 5,000 $ 4.00 $ 20,000.00 Handicap Ramp EA 4 $ 660.00 $ 2,640.00 Signage & Strippin2 LF 1,000 $ 1.70 $ 1,700.00 AVE. 62 STREET TOTAL $ 194,090.00 SEWER S" V.C.P. LF 12,375 $ 40.00 $ 495,000.00 Manhole EA 42 $ 3,500.00 $ 147,000.00 Bore Under Channel LF 500 $ 660.00 $ 330,000.00 R & R Street SF 91,000 $ 6.50 $ 591,500.00 SEWER TOTAL $ 1,563,500.00 WATER 12" D.I.P. LF 12,250 $ 140.00 $ 1,715,000.00 Fire Hydrant Assembt EA 25 $ 4,500.00 $ 112,500.00 R & R Street SF 90,000• $ 6.50 1 $ 585,000.00 WATER TOTAL $ 2,412,500.00 STORM DRAIN LS 1 $ 75,000.00 1 ; 76,000.00 DRY UTILITIES Includes Conduit, Vaults, Etc. LF 1,000 $ 60.00 '$ 60,000.00 RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION LS 1 $ 350,000.00 $ 350,000.00 ENVIRONMENTAL.. AND ENGINEERING COST 15% of Construction Cost $ 1,063,326.00 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION LS 1 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 HYDRO STATION EA 1 $ 750,000.00 750,000.00 BOOSTER STATION EA 1 $ 750,000.00 $ 750,000.00 SUB -TOTAL AVE. 62 INFRASTRUCTURE Contingency TOTAL AVE. 62 INFRASTRUCTURE 20% $ $ $ 7,318 ' 416.00 1,4£3,683.20 8,782,099,20 40737.05/05-06-21/Prelim. Cost Est. Page 1 TRAVERTINE PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST 6/21/2005 PLEASE NOTE: THIS ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST IS BASED ON INFORMATION AVAILABLE AT THE TIME AND MAY NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS INCURRED. THIS COST ESTIMATE IS BASED ON A CONCEPTUAL LAND USE PLAN DATED MARCH 2, 2005 (REVISED) BY TKC. TKC MAKES NO GUARANTEE AS TO ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS INCURRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. DESCRIPTION I UNIT I QUANTITY I UNIT PRICE TOTAL AVE 62 INFRASTRUCTURE EXTENSION STREET APPROX. 2,350 L.F. INTO SECTION 5 Rough Grade CY 10,000 $ 1.50 $ 15,000.00 Fine Grade Street Area SF 135,000 $ 0.25 $ 33,750.00 4" A.C. over 10" A.B. SF 81,000 $ 3.25 $ 263,250.00 8" Curb & Gutter LF 4,500 $ 18.00 $ 81,000.00 5' Sidewalk SF 11,250 $ 4.00 $ 45,000.00 Handicap Ramp EA 4 $ 660.00 $ 2,640.00 Signage & Stripping LF 2,250 $ 1.70 $ 3,825.00 STREET TOTAL $ 444,465.00 SEWER 8W.C.P. LF 2,250 Is 40.00 $ 90,000.00 Manhole EA 8 $ 3,500.00 $ 28,000.00 SEWER TOTAL $ 118,000.00 WATER 12" D.I.P. LF 2,250 $ 130.00 $ 292,500.00 Fire Hydrant Assembly EA 5 $ 4,500.001 $ 22,500.00 WATER TOTAL $ 315,000.00 STORM DRAIN LS 1 $ 150,000.00 1 $ 150,000.00 DRY UTILITIES Includes Conduit, Vaults, Etc. LF 1 2,250 $ 60.00 $ 135,000.00 RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION LS 1 Is 1,000,000.00 $ 1,000,000.00 ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING COST 15% of Construction Cost $ 295,495.00 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION LS 1 is 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 SUB -TOTAL AVE. 62 INFRASTRUCTURE EXTENSION Contingency TOTAL AVE. 62 INFRASTRUCTURE EXTENSION 20% $ $ $ 2,557,960.00 511,592.00 3,069,552.00 Note: The cost estimates do not include any costs related to development of onsite Infrastructure, such as onsite retention, water improvements, sewer improvements, offsite drainage, hillside grading, fire department access, mitigation requirements, etc. The cost estimates shown above are based on TKC's familiarity with local construction estimates based on the information available as of the date of this estimate. 40737.05/05-06-21/Prelim. Cost Est. Page 2 PROP. TRAIL CONNECTOR (Approved by agencies 5/24/05) PROPOSED TRAIL CONNECTOR PLAN Goal: To develop a trail around the Travertine project that addresses the concerns of the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service (the "Service"), Bureau of Land Management (`BLM"), Bureau of Reclamation ("BOR"), the City of La Quinta (the "City"), and Travertine Corporation ("Travertine'). The Proposed Trail Connector Plan (the "Trail") begins on Dike No. 4 at Avenue 62. ' Hikers may leave the Dike and proceed south on the Madison Street alignment (as requested by the City) until reaching the southern boundary of Travertine's project area. Equestrians would be required to continue along the Dike until the Avenue 64 alignment, then proceed west along the Avenue 64 alignment until they join the Trail at the Madison Street alignment. The Trail then follows the southern perimeter of the Travertine project area until it reaches the base of the Martinez Rockslide. The Trail follows the base of the Rockslide until it reaches the section line between Section 4 and Section 5. The Trail then turns northerly along the western perimeter of the Travertine project until it reaches Section 32, where the Trail turns gently easterly towards Jefferson Street. The Trail then parallels the west side of Jefferson Street (i.e., the section line between Section 32 and Section 33), until it eventually connects with the Boo Hoff Trail. Trail Terms and Conditions: 1. The Trail is open to the public during the same months and hours as the City -approved Trails Plan, the CVAG MSHCP Trails Plan and the Trails Management Plan of BLM. 2. If required, Travertine will install a voluntary trail sign -in box at the trail heads. 3. Parking is allowed at the Commercial Center at Madison and Avenue 62. The City requests a small trail head parking area off of Madison Street near the southern boundary of Travertine's project area. (See Trails Exhibit.) No parking is allowed along the Avenue 64 alignment or elsewhere within the Trail. z ' Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District ("CVRPD") proposes to build a trails head and related support facilities on BOR -managed land in Section 28, north of Coral Mountain. The CVRPD trail would proceed south through Coral Mountain, then south along Dike No. 4 to the Avenue 64 alignment. Travertine's Trail Connector seeks to provide hikers and equestrians a connection from the CVRPD trail to the Martinez Rockslide National Monument and the Boo Hoff Trail. 2 As proposed by the City of La Quinta, Madison Street south of Avenue 62 would be 24 -feet wide and lie entirely within the public right-of-way, consisting of 30 feet on either side of 4. Signage posted at key points along the Trail, as determined by the Service, warns users -not to leave the Trail. Advantages: A. By providing access to the Boo Hoff Trail via Dike No. 4, this Trail loops the Travertine project and provides the connectivity sought by the local hiking and equestrian communities, as required by the La Quinta City General Plan. B. By providing access to the Martinez Rockslide National Monument, this Trail addresses the public access concerns expressed by the City and BLM. C. By eliminating the "Y" trail in Sections 4 and 32, routing the Trail along the perimeter of the Travertine development in Sections 4 and 5, and moving the Trail to the eastern portion of Section 32, near Jefferson Street, this Trail limits access to those areas that the Service has already acknowledged are lower quality PBS habitat? the section line. The surface of this extension of Madison Street would consist of an all-weather surface as required by IID Energy, if IID Energy decides to locate an electrical substation in Section 3. If IID Energy decides not to do so, Madison Street would be surfaced with crushed gravel. The parking area off Madison Street would also serve as a turn -around and would also be surfaced with crushed gravel. 3 The Service previously proposed that Travertine swap land with BLM to permit the development of the eastern portion of Section 32, on the basis that that land would eventually be adjacent to development already outside of Critical Habitat. Using the same rationale, routing the Trail along the perimeter of Travertine's development area will result in no loss of high quality habitat because the Trail will be located on Travertine property that the Service has already indicated Travertine may develop, as set forth in the Travertine/BLM Biological Assessment Project Description. Travertine/A1136-18a/Trai]Connector 2 REGULATORY LANGUAGE CITY OF LA QUINTA ZONING ORDINANCE Regulatory Language.— Land Use, Open Space, Hillside Conservation, and Transfer of Development Rights The following listed information is provided verbatim from the noted sections within Title 9 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. RL — Low Density Residential District (Section 9.30.030): The purpose and intent of this zoning district is to provide for the development and preservation of low density neighborhoods (two to four units per acre) with one- and two-story single-family detached dwellings on large or medium sized lots and/or, subject to a specific plan, projects with clustered smaller dwellings, such and one- and two-story single-family attached, townhome or condominium dwellings, with generous open space. RL Development Standards Minimum lot size 7200 sq. ft. Minimum lot frontage 60 ft. Maximum structure height 28 ft. Maximum number of stories 2 Minimum front yard setback (non -garage portions of dwelling) 20 ft." Minimum garage setback 25 ft. Minimum interior/exterior side yard setbacks 5/10 ft. Minimum rear yard setback 10 ft. for existing recorded lots and 20 ft. for new lots Maximum lot coverage 50% Minimum livable floor area excluding arae 1400 sq. ft. Minimum landscape setbacks adjacent to perimeter streets 10 ft. minimum at any point, 20ft. minimum average over entire frontage Projects with five or more adjacent dwelling units facing the same street shall incorporate front setbacks varying between 20 feet and 25 feet plus, in order to avoid street monotony. Twenty feet if "roll -up" type garage door is used. For interior setbacks, if the building is over 17 feet in height, the setback is five feet plus one foot for every foot over 17 feet in height or fraction thereof, to maximum setback of ten feet. The additional setback may be provided entirely at grade level or a combination of at grade and airspace above the 17 -foot building. OS — Open Space District (Section 9.110.050): The purpose and intent of this zoning district is to provide for the protection and preservation of sensitive environmental areas such as areas with significant cultural resources, threatened or endangered plant and wildlife species habitat, scenic resources and significant topographical constraints. PR - Parks and Recreation District (Section 9.110.030): The purpose and intent of this zoning district is to provide for the development and preservation of public and private parks and associated recreation facilities within open space areas. The following is a summary of development standards for the PR district as set forth in Chapter 9.130. (Note: the GC and OS development standards are the C Regulatory Language -- 'Section 5 - Land Use, Open Space, Hillside Conservation, and Transfer of Development Rights same as those for the PR district.) OS Development Standards Minimum building site n/a Maximum structure height 28 ft. Maximum number of stories 2 Minimum building setbacks: From all perimeter street ROWs 30 ft. From abutting residential projects 30 ft. From abutting commercial, office, industrial, and MC (major community facilities district) projects 20 ft. Minimum setback from interior property lines within the same project 0 HC — Hillside Conservation Overlay District (Section 9.110.070): The purpose and intent of this overlay zoning district is as follows; 1. To define those hillside areas which are not developable from either a public safety or an engineering perspective and to prevent inappropriate development on them; 2. For those hillside areas which are developable, to ensure the safety of the public, and to ensure that the placement, density and type of all hillside development within the city is suitable to the topography of the existing terrain, that proposed developments will provide for minimal disturbance of the existing terrain and natural .habitat, and that the natural hillside characteristics will be retained wherever practicable; 3. To protect the public from hazards associated with hillside development, including seismic activity, landslides, flooding, inaccessibility from fire and emergency services, lack of water for fire control, wildfires, collapse of roads and similar risks; 4. To protect and conserve hillside ecosystems (Santa Rosa Mountains National Scenic Area) through the retention of unique natural topographic features and hillside characteristics, including drainage patterns, streams, slopes, ridgelines, rock outcroppings, vistas, natural vegetation, and the habitats and migratory routes of animals; 5. To maximize the retention of the city's natural topographic features, including, but not limited to, mountainsides, mountain faces, skyline profiles, ridgelines, ridgecrests, hilltops, hillsides, slopes, arroyos, ravines, canyons, prominent vegetation, rock outcroppings, view corridors, and scenic vistas through the careful limitation and selection of building sites and building pads on said topographic features, thereby enhancing the beauty of the city's landscape; 6. To assure that developmental use of said topographic features will relate to the surrounding topography and will not be conspicuous and obtrusive because of the design and location of the developmental use; 7. To reduce the scarring effects of excessive grading for roads, building pads and cut and fill slopes; 8. To balance public and private interests while preserving the hillsides. HC Development Standards Minimum lot size 120,000 sq. ft. Page 2 Regulatory Language — Section 5 - Land Use, Open Space, Hillside Conservation, and Transfer of Development Rights Minimum lot frontage 100 ft. Maximum structure height 28 ft. " Maximum number of stories 2 _ Minimum front yard setback 30 ft. Minimum interior/exterior side yard setbacks 10/20 ft. Minimum rear yard setback 30 ft. Maximum lot coverage 30% Minimum Livable floor area excluding arae 1400 sq. ft. Minimum landscape setbacks adjacent to perimeter streets', average over entire frontage —1 10 ft. min. at any point, 20 ft. min, Minimum common open area 40% Building height may be limited below 28 feet if necessary for building to not be visible above the ridgeline profile when viewed from the Valley floor. Viewshed studies may be required to ensure that this standard is met. Does not apply to single-family detached unless a specific plan is required. Landscaping and open areas shall be per the standards of Section 9.60.240. In addition to the aforementioned development standards, supplemental special purpose regulations specific to the HC district are provided for in LQMC Section 9.140.040. The standards set forth in this Section are detailed and specific with the objective being to minimize the habitat and aesthetic impact associated with any development proposed within the HC district. 9.140.040 HC hillside conservation regulations. A. Applicability. 1. The HC hillside conservation overlay district applies to all land within the City designated in the general plan as "open space" and shown on the official zoning map as "HC." More specifically, the HC district and the provisions of this section apply to land meeting the criteria for being above "the toe of the slope," as defined in this section, within the following sections of land (San Bernardino Base and Meridian) within the city: a. T5S, R7E: Sections 19, 30; b. T5S, R6E: Section 36, 25; C. T6S, R6E: Sections 1, 12, 13, 24, 25; d. T6S, R7E: Sections 6, 7, 8, 17, 18, 19, 20, 28, 29, 30, 33; e. T7S, R7E: Sections 4, 5. 2. The provisions of this section shall also apply to each and every parcel of land within the city (without otherwise being noted on exhibit or map which is added to the city by annexation, dedication or other means) meeting the criteria for being above "the toe of the slope." 3. Except as specifically provided elsewhere in this title, any and all disturbance of natural terrain, grubbing, grading, new use, and every new building and premises or land in the HC district shall be used for or occupied and every building shall be erected, constructed, established, altered, enlarged, maintained, moved into or within such HC district exclusively and only in accordance with regulations set forth in this section. B. Application of Regulations to Property. 1. In the city general plan, all hillsides and some alluvial fans are designated Page 3 Regulatory Language — Section 5 - Land Use, ©pen Space, Hillside Conservation, and Transfer of Development.. Rights open space. In general, the dividing line between open space and other land uses is meant to follow and be bounded by "the toe of the slope." The area above the toe of the slope includes not only hillsides, but also alluvial fans which are not protected by flood control structures, and drainage ways and stream courses which have some potential for flooding. In general, alluvial fans not exceeding twenty percent slope are developable consistent with this section either through the transfer of residential units from contiguous hillside areas, by change of designation, or by providing flood protection. 2. For any parcel subject to the jurisdiction of the city, the city engineer, upon viewing the site and considering a land suitability study submitted by the applicant (in accordance with the requirements of this section) shall determine the boundary between the developable and the undevelopable portions of the parcel by locating the toe of the slope per the following criteria (more than one criterion may apply): a. The point where waterborne alluvial material not exceeding twenty percent slope begins to collect to a depth of one foot or more; b. The dividing line between steeper rock formations and more gently sloping alluvium, i.e., where there is a noticeable break in the angle of slope from steep to shallow; C. Where the slope gradient exceeds twenty percent; d. An area unprotected from flooding potential, i.e., an area above the uppermost flood control structure which intercepts runoff (in the form of either natural watercourses or as overland sheet flow) and directs it to a controlled stormwater diversion channel. C. Permitted Uses in HC District. 1. No development (except as provided under subsection C4 of this section) shall be approved for slopes exceeding twenty percent. 2. T; -,e following are exempt from the requirements of this section: tracts and specific plans already approved. 3. The following uses within the HC district shall be permitted on alluvial fans with slopes not exceeding twenty percent: a. Golf courses (not including above -ground structures), including fairways, greens, tees and golf -cart paths to access them; b. Flood control structures; C. Parks, lakes and passive recreation facilities; d. Water wells, pumping stations and water tanks (if properly screened); e. Power, telephone and cable substations and transmission lines (if properly screened or undergrounded); f. TV, cable and radio antennas; g. Hiking, bicycle and equestrian trails; h. Single-family residential uses; i. Accessory uses necessary to establish and maintain the permitted uses, such as roads, gatehouses, on-site subdivision signs, parking lots, noncommercial community association, recreation, and assembly buildings and facilities. 4. The following uses within the HC district shall be permitted on slopes exceeding twenty percent: Page 4 Regulatory Language -- Section 5 - Land Use, Open Space, Hillside Conservation, and Transfer of Development Rights a. Hiking, bicycle and equestrian trails not permitting vehicles; b. Access roads which shall be nonvisible unless applicant can prove to the satisfaction of the: city that the only access to a nonvisible area must traverse a visible area. (Ownership or nonownership of property is not sufficient proof of reason to place a road in a visible area.) Roads shall not exceed fifteen percent grade. C. Uses listed in subsection (C)(3) of this section may be permitted provided the land was graded or otherwise significantly disturbed prior to January 1, 1996, and only if the scarred location is visible from more than one-quarter of a mile away. D. Conditional Use Permit Required. In addition to the requirements of this section, all development within the HC district shall require approval of a conditional use permit pursuant to Section 9.210.020. E. Site Development Review Required. All development in the HC district shall be subject to site development review by the planning commission pursuant to Section 9.210.010. "Development" in this context shall include the following: grading, building, grubbing, or permitting any heavy equipment (equipment whose function is digging, clearing, earth -moving, grading, or a similar function disruptive to the natural terrain) access to the HC district property. F. Criteria for Review of Grading Plans. The planning commission and city council shall consider the following matters of particular concern in their review of grading proposals in the HC district. Conditions may be attached to the approval of grading plans so as to achieve the purpose and intent of this section and the following objectives: 1. The health and safety of the public; 2. The preservation of vegetation and animal habitat, designation of stream courses as open space, preservation of habitat corridors, encouraging revegetation with drought -tolerant native species; 3. The avoidance of excessive building, padding or terracing and cut and fill slopes to reduce the scarring effects of grading; 4. The encouragement of sensitive grading to ensure optimum treatment of natural hillside and arroyo features; 5. The encouragement of imaginative grading plans to soften the impact of grading on hillsides, including rolled, sloping or split pads, rounded cut and fill slopes, and post and beam construction techniques; and 6. The maximum retention of vistas, and natural topographic features including mountainsides, ridgelines, hilltops, slopes, rock outcroppings, arroyos, ravines and canyons. G. Engineering Reviews Required. For every home site or for every subdivision proposed within the HC district, the following reports shall be prepared by a California -licensed engineer (licensed in the appropriate discipline), and filed with the city engineer, unless specifically waived by the city engineer based on a visit to the proposed site: 1. Hydrology, drainage and flooding report for all sites; 2. Soil survey of the sites proposed attesting to stability of all sites and the appropriateness of the construction method proposed; 3. Underlying geology/engineering report attesting to stability of all sites; 4. Seismic analysis attesting to the stability of the site(s) and addressing the potential of material above the site(s) impacting the site(s); Page 5 Regulatory Language — Section 5 - Land Use, Open Space Hillside Conservation. and Transfer of Development Rights 5. Access plan showing the preliminary engineering for roads giving access to the proposed site(s); 6. Grading plan for the construction site(s) and access routes; and 7. A utility plan demonstrating the feasibility of providing water for domestic and fire suppression purposes, sewer, power, and other utilities, especially with regard to the scarring effects of the grading necessary to install such utilities. The city engineer shall specifically approve each proposed site and access route based on the submitted reports. H. Other Studies Required. The following studies shall be filed with the community development department as a part of the application process: 1. All development in the HC district shall be subject to a report by a qualified biologist addressing the following: a. Natural vegetation and native plants which may be affected by the project; b. Wildlife habitats, migratory routes (e.g., for Bighorn sheep), and native animal species; and C. Plans to maintain corridors for wildlife habitat and movement of animals within HC district. 2. All development in the HC district shall be subject to a review by a qualified archaeologist addressing the following: a. A review of the literature and records for any known and/or recorded historic or prehistoric resources; b. A survey of the project site for historic or prehistoric resources; and c. A final report of findings and recommended mitigation and resource treatment shall be submitted to the community development director for review. 3. A plan for the preservation of all areas exceeding slopes above ten percent as specified in subsection 16 of this section, including: a. The designation of all areas exceeding ten percent slope, with the degree of slope noted, and the calculation of the percent to be left undisturbed; b. The designation of all watercourses both natural and man-made, with plans for the preservation and/or reintroduction of native drought tolerant plans. Watercourses shall be designated as open space; and C. A monitoring program (following CEQA) for the preservation of open spaces. 4. A viewshed study, including plans and sections, showing visibility of proposed project and grading as viewed from surrounding properties located at lower elevations. I. Grading, Grubbing and Scarring Control. 1. No permits shall be issued for any grading, grubbing, building or structure in the HC district until grading plans, slope planting and irrigation plans, and building elevations for design review have been submitted to the planning commission for approval. In reviewing plans for grading, slope planting and irrigation, native revegetation, mitigation of scarring caused by grubbing and grading, preservation of the natural state of the hillsides Page 6 Regulatory Language — Section 5 - Land Use, Open Space, Hillside Conservation, and Transfer of Development Rights and water courses (based on siope angle) and building elevations, the commission and council shall consider the purpose and intent of this section and the criteria established in this section, together with applicable standards and shall approve the design if all applicable provisions are met. 2. Conditions may be applied when the proposed development does not comply with applicable standards so as to bring such development into conformity or the plans and drawings may be disapproved and the city shall specify the standard or standards that are not met. 3. Any person who fails to protect the natural terrain, defaces, grades, grubs, scars or otherwise disrupts the natural terrain in the HC district without prior city approval of plans for such work subject to this section shall have created a public nuisance which shall be abated. Abatement may include the property owner undertaking the restoration (under city supervision and monitoring), or that failing, city -contracted restoration of the disrupted area. The property owner may be charged the cost of the restoration together with the direct costs of supervision and monitoring of the restoration. If the property owner fails to reimburse the city for the costs incurred, a lien against the property for payment may be instituted. 4. Any plans which are being considered by the city for development shall, at the time of discovery of the creation of the public nuisance, be denied by the decision-making authority. After such time as the public nuisance has been completely abated, the plans may be resubmitted upon payment of all required fees. 5. The provisions of this section shall be in addition to other municipal code titles and regulations applicable to grading activities within the city. No grading shall be conducted, nor shall any grading permit be issued for grading in the HC district until grading plans and special drawings showing grading and topography as viewed from critical locations within the neighborhood or community have been approved by the planning commission. J. Development Standards. 1. Maximum Density and Minimum Lot Size. In the HC district, the maximum density permitted shall be one residential unit per ten acres. On a contiguous parcel which includes areas both above and below the "toe of th -- slope," residential units may be clustered together below the "toe of the slope" to take advantage of buildable areas with lower slope angles, provided the overall density for the parcel of one unit per ten acres is not exceeded. Structures shall remain single-family, separated, on individual lots having an area of at least twenty thousand square feet. 2. Setback Requirements. The requirements for the RVL very low density district shall apply. 3. Maximum Building Height. The requirements for the RVL district shall apply except that no structure shall be placed in such a way that its outline is visible above a ridgeline. 4. Parking. Off-street requirements shall conform to Chapter 9.150. 5. Roof Equipment. No roof -top equipment for heating, cooling or other purposes shall be permitted. 6. Architecture. The architectural treatment of structures within the HC Page 7 RegUlatory Language — Section 5 - Land Use, Open Space, Hillside Conservation, and Transfer of Development Rights district shall be compatible with the setting of the structure and shall be generally consistent with requirements of the desert setting and other architectural treatments found elsewhere in the city. Use of indigenous materials for the structure of walls should be encouraged. Fencing and walls shall conform to the standards for the RC cove residential district standards as set forth in Section 9.30.050. 7. Landscaping. a. On the cut or pad occupied by the structure, landscaping may be left to the choice of the homeowner providing some selection of drought -tolerant species is included. Elsewhere on the site (or within open space), native vegetation shall be undisturbed or shall be recreated after approved grading. b. The applicant or developer shall be responsible for the maintenance of all slope planting and irrigation systems until such time as the properties arz occupied or at the time a new property owner or homeowner's association accepts the responsibility to maintain the landscaping in common areas, or other maintenance district formation is established. 8. Utilities. All utilities shall be placed underground except for water tanks and substations, which shall be appropriately screened and painted in colors to blend into the background. K. Land Divisions in HC District. In order to assure compliance with the provisions of this section, the following requirements shall apply to the proposed division of any property which is partially or completely within the HC district: A preliminary grading plan prepared in accordance with the provisions of municipal code Title 13 and this section shall be submitted (together with other requirements of this section) with every conditional use permit, tentative subdivision map or parcel map filed for approval. The preliminary grading plan shall show at least one practical, usable and accessible building site which can be developed in accordance with the provisions of this section within each proposed lot or parcel. L. Transfer of Development Rights. 1. Transfers of development rights shall follow the procedures and standards set forth in Chapter 9.190. 2. Any owner of property within the HC district may transfer development rights from the HC district on the basis of one residential unit per ten acres. 3. Development rights may be transferred as follows: a. Transferred to a subdivided portion of the same property below "the toe of the slope," as presented in a conditional use permit; or b. By means of sale to any area of the city which has been zoned for residential purposes, provided the increase for any particular parcel does not exceed twenty percent of the general plan density designation; C. Development rights may be retained by an individual; d. Transfer rights may be further sold as provided in Chapter 9.190. 4. Any owner of property within the HC district may sell, bequeath or transfer the development rights of the property, in accordance with this section and Chapter 9.190 to any governmental jurisdiction or any properly organized nonprofit organization whose charter allows for the ownership Page 8 Regulatory Language - Section 5 - Land Use, Open Space, Hillside Conservation, and Transfer of Development Rights - - of public open space. The governmental jurisdiction or nonprofit organization may retain or sell or transfer acquired development rights in accordance with Chapter 9.190. M. Relocation of Toe of Slope. If, as a result of an approved developmental project, a flood control structure is placed higher on a hillside area so that an area of alluvial fan becomes protected from flooding potential, or if the location of the toe of the slope is moved by alteration of some other criterion set forth in subsection B of this section for determining the location of the toe of the slope, the new area below the toe of the slope shall remain within the HC district. The conditional use permit approved for the development shall determine the effective density of any new developable portion of the new area by virtue of the transfer of development rights from the hillside areas to the new area. N. Ownership and Maintenance of Recreation/Open Space. 1. Those areas located within a hillside development controlled by this section which are to remain as undeveloped open space, such as undevelopable slopes and natural landmarks, may be offered for dedication for game preserve, recreation or open space purposes. Such areas may be offered to a public agency or to a nonprofit land trust, conservancy or similar organization whose charter allows for the ownership of recreation and open space which will preserve the natural open space in perpetuity. 2. If an offer of dedication under subsection N1 of this section is not accepted, the developer shall make provisions for the ownership and care of the open space in such a manner that there can be necessary protection and maintenance thereof. Such area shall be provided with appropriate access and shall be designated as a separate parcel or parcels which may be maintained through special fees charged to the residents of the subject development or through an appropriate homeowner's association or maintenance district. O. Change in Designation of HC Land. All lands within the HC hillside conservation district are designated on the general plan land use policy diagram as "open space.",A property owner may propose a change from this designation and from the HC district zoning by means of all of the following procedures: 1. Approval of a general plan amendment from open space designation to an equally appropriate category. 2. Approval of a change of zone from HC to an equally appropriate district. 3. Approval of a specific plan for the property. 4. Satisfaction of the engineering and other reviews required in this section. 5. Compliance with all other provisions of this section except subsection C, J1, 2 and 3, L and M. Transfer of development rights (chapter 9.190): The purpose of this program is as follows; A. All transfers of development rights or credits shall follow the definitions, procedures, timing, and documentation presented in this chapter, and shall observe the restrictions and guidelines presented in other enabling sections, such as Section 9.140.040 (Hillside conservation regulations), and others which may be from time to time adopted enabling transfers of development rights or credits. Page 9 Regulatory Language -- Section 5 - Land Use, Open Space, Hillside Conservation, and Transfer of Development Rights B. The purpose of this chapter is to provide the process by which development rights or credits may be transferred from donor parcels to receiving parcels such as in open space land use designations to enable it to be preserved as open space, and other purposes which may be adopted in other enabling legislation. Such transfers of development rights or credits may be within the same property, or may take place from one property to another by means of sale. C Transfers shall take place under the guidance of the city and shall be documented by means of recordation. The program procedures are as follows; A, The enabling section shall specify by class the donor parcels and the receiving parcels, the number of residential development rights or credits which can be transferred per square footage or per acre; and the limits of development rights or credits which can be transferred to any one parcel. B. The donor parcels, from which development rights are being removed must: 1. Remove all development rights or credits at the same time (residual development rights or credits cannot be left on the property); 2. Be mappable; according to the Subdivision Map Act requirements, i.e., a legal description and a total acreage will be required to be recorded. 3. Record a document which acknowledges that all development rights or credits for the described parcel have been extinguished and that no further residential development can occur on the parcel. C. The receiving parcel, to which development rights or credits are being transferred, must: 1. Be mappable; according to the Subdivision Map Act requirements, i.e., a legal description and a total acreage will be required to be recorded; 2. Record a document of affixture (or attachment) which has been attested to by the city clerk of the city, tying the transferred development rights or credits to a specific parcel, in perpetuity, following the sense of the example of language contained in Section 9.190.050. U This document of transfer and affixture must be recorded. Evidence of the recordation must be supplied to the city clerk of the city within thirty days of the date of attestation by the city clerk. E. The City Clerk shall only attest to a transfer of development rights or credits upon receipt of written authorization from the city manager. The City Manager shall only authorize such transfer after receiving a report from the planning and development department containing a recommendation and a synopsis of the engineering report from the public works director. F, If a property consists of both undevelopable and developable portions, the applicant may apply for the subdivision of the parcel to allow transfer of rights from the undevelopable portion to the developable portion. 9.250.010 Subdivisions. Page 10 Requlatory Language e Section 5 - Land Use, Open Space, Hillside Conservation, and Transfer of Development Rights Tract maps, parcel maps and related subdivision applications shall be processed in accordance with the city's subdivision code. 9.250.020 Environmental review. A. Definition. "Environmental review" means all actions and procedures required of the city and of applicants by the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA," State Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the CEQA Guidelines (Public Resources Code Section 15000 et seq.) and local environmental procedures. B. Procedures. All discretionary applications shall be evaluated in compliance with CEQA the CEQA Guidelines, and the city's environmental review procedures to determine the proposal's potential impacts. Examples of potential impacts include but are not limited to: climate and air quality, soils, geology and seismicity, hydrology, biotic resources, archaeology, paleontology and cultural resources, land use and zoning, traffic, noise, aesthetics, light and glare, health and safety, public services and utilities, and threatened or endangered species. Page 11 POLICY LANGUAGE CITY OF LA QUINTA General Plan Policy Language Section 5 - Land Use, Open Space, Natural Resources CHAPTER 2 - LAND USE ELEMENT Purpose: The Land Use Element is critical to the continued growth and stability of the City, including its residents' quality of life, economic health and the health if its environment. The inclusion and consideration of Environmental Hazards and Conservation are both also critical for effective land use planning. (Excerpts from larger purpose statement) LAND USE GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS GOAL 3 Protection of our natural environment. Policy 5 All land use development proposals shall be consistent with all applicable land use policies and standards contained in the General Plan. OTHER LAND USE GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS GOAL 2 The preservation of open space and recreational resources as a means of preserving and enhancing the quality of life and economic base of the City. Policy 3 The City shall participate in efforts to preserve and protect sensitive resources throughout the City, its sphere of influence, Planning Area No. i and Planning Area No. 2. Program 3.1: The City shall maintain and enforce its Hillside Preservation Ordinance. Program 3.2: The City shall amend the Land Use Map as necessary to ensure the preservation of sensitive resources through the designation of land as open space. Program 3.3: The City shall encourage the use of native landscaping and "links" golf courses which preserve natural open space areas. CHAPTER 3 — TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT Policy 7 The City will continue to participate in the assessment of the potential for development of perimeter trails in the La Quinta area through the Coachella Valley Trails and Big Horn Working Group. CHAPTER 4 — OPEN SPACE ELEMENT Purpose: The purpose of the Open Space Element is to establish the City's goals, polices and programs relating to the preservation and management of open space lands. Open space policies and programs are designed to discourage the premature or inappropriate conversion of open space to more intense land uses. They are also intended to assure the long-term viability of open spaces for continued availability and possible production, and for recreational and scenic enjoyment. Policy Language — Section 5 -- Land Use, Open :Space. Natural Resources OPEN SPACE ELEMENT GOAL, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS GOAL Preservation, conservation and management of the City's open space lands and scenic resources for enhanced recreational, environmental and economic purposes. Policy 1 The City shall identify and map lands suitable for preservation as passive and active open space. Program 1.1: Lands suitable for preservation as open space shall be designated on the General Plan Land Use map. Program 1.2: The City shall confer with adjoining communities and other responsible agencies to periodically review and update information on regional open space, and to coordinate preservation efforts. Policy 2 Hillsides and alluvial fans with slopes exceeding 20 percent shall be preserved as open space. Program 2.1: The City shall continue to implement its Hillside Conservation Zone Ordinance to protect visual, biological and other resources within mountainous and sloped areas from impacts associated with urban development. Program 2.2: The City shall explore and utilize, where appropriate, a variety of measures to preserve privately owned properties within hillside and alluvial fan areas. Program 2.3: The City shall identify agencies and property owners which hold fee simple title to properties located in hillside and alluvial fan areas, and should encourage agreements which assure that such lands remain undeveloped in perpetuity. Policy 4 Unique and valuable biological resources shall be preserved as open space, to the greatest extent practical. Program 4.1: The City shall continue to participate in the development of the Coachella Valley Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CV MSHCP). Program 4.3: The City shall review development applications for currently vacant land to determine whether the site shall be reviewed by a qualified wildlife biologist to evaluate potential project -related impacts to biological resources. Projects determined to have potential impacts on important biological resources shall incorporate adequate mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to levels of insignificance. Policy 6 Develop a comprehensive multi-purpose trails network to link open space areas. Policy 7 The City shall encourage the preservation of open space in privately owned development Page 2 Policy Language — Section 5 -- Land Use, Oven Space, Natural Resources shall be designated as open space. Policy 5 Sensitive habitat areas shall be buffered from urban development to the greatest extent practical. Program 5.1: The City shall use zoning standards and the design review process to assure that adequate buffers are provided in environmentally sensitive areas. Program 5.2: Encourage and participate in the establishment of multiple use corridors that utilize drainage channels and utility easements as wildlife and recreation corridors. Program 5.3: The City shall consider requiring barriers around the perimeter of any new project that borders the hillsides to protect bighorn sheep if they are demonstrated to occur on the project site. Informal consultation and/or review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game shall be completed prior to construction of a barrier. Exhibit 6.7 — Peninsular Bighorn Sheep (attached) CHAPTER 8 — ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS ELEMENT FLOODING AND HYDROLOGY Policy 6 Major drainage facilities, including debris basins and flood control channels, shall provide for the enhancement of wildlife habitat and community open space, to the greatest extent practical, while still maintaining their functional qualities. Program 6.1: Coordinate with CVWD to assure that designs which provide for enhanced wildlife habitat and open spaca amenities, such as hiking and equestrian trails, are fully explored and integrated into major drainage facilities, to the greatest extent practical. Page 4