Loading...
CC Resolution 1995-036^#Hi lIL RESOLUTION 95-36 F A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025 AS BEING ADEQUATE AND COMPLETE; RECOGNIZING THE OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS TO CERTAIN ADVERSE IMPACTS; AND RECOGNIZING THE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED, BUT WHICH CAN BE REASONABLY MITIGATED, IF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025- CERTIFICATION DF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT GREEN) WHEREAS, WInchester Asset Management has proposed a Specific Plan on 331.0 acres, consisting of * resort dwemng uni* on 94 acres, and 231.2 acres of open space; and, WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report 11ereinafter Em") has been prepared and circulated, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970; and, WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State of California and the City of La Quinta, in accordance with the provisions of California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 fliereinafter CEQA), as amended Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.), that the City shall not approve a project unless there is no feasible way to lessen or avoid significant effects; meaning all impacts have been avoided to the extent feasible or substantially lessened and any remaining unavoidable significant impacts are acceptable based on CEOA, Section 15093; and, WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State of California and the City of La Quinta, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, as amended Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.), and the State Guidelines for implementation of CEQA, as amended California AdmInistrative Code, Section 15000 et seq.), that the City shall balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks prior to project approval; meaning that if the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered acceptable; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta has read and considered all environmental documentation comprising the EIR, has found that the EIR considers all potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, is complete and adequate, and fully compiles with all requirements of CEQA, the State Guidelines for implementation; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered certain overridlng considerations to adverse impacts, the CEQA FIndings and Statements of Facts; and, RESOPC.146 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi 51 Resolution *36 WHEREAS, prior to action on the project, the City Council has considered all significant Impacts, mitigation measures, and project alternatives Identified in the Em, has found that all potentially significant Impacts on the project have been lessened or avoided to the eitent feasible; and, WHEREAS, Section 15093(b) requires, where the certification of the City Council allows the occurrences of significant effects which are identified in the FEIR but are not adequately mitigated, the City must state in writing the reasons to BUpport its action based on the FEIR andlor other information in the record; and, WHEREAS, CEOA and the State CECA Guideilnes provide that no pubic agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an Em has been completed and which identifies one or more significant effects of the project unless the public agency makes written findings for each of the significant effects, accompanied by a statement of facts supporting each finding. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, does hereby certify the FEIR for Specific Plan 94.025 as adequate and complete. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, in addition to findings made in the body of the Ilinal EIR, finds that the Statements of Overriding Considerations as shown on attached Exhibit A" entitled Statement of Overriding Considerations", which is incorporated herein as though set forth at len* BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, adopts the CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts as showu on attached Exhibit B" entitled CEQA Findings and Statement of Fact", which is incorporated herein as though set forth at length. APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regiliar meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on tills 6th day of June, 1995. AYES: Council Members Bangerter, Cathcart, Sniff, Mayor Pena NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Perkins ABSTAIN: None RuOPc.146 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi 4i i Ai * Ieaolutlon 95N r\f\F\ city of La *uinta, California city of La *uinta, Calirornia DAWN HONEYWELL, City Atto*oy City of La quinta F RESOPC.146 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi a,$qr,,. Ii L. Ii EXHIBIT A" STATEMENT OF OVEUIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. Implementation of the project will indlrectiy result in the elimination of the negative impacts associated with vacant property in favor of a quality housing development. 2. The proposed project is necessary to enhance the quality of ilfe in the project area sought as essential and beneficial in attracting new residents, business, and visitors to La *ulnta, and generally promoting increased investment and return on property values. 3. Impacts identified as significant from project Implementation are generally associated with normal growth, progress, and prosperity. 4. The project will be instrumental in causIng new area*wide publlc facWties to be constructed, wnich will benefit both existing development and other future adjacent development. 5. Specific plan project Implementation will ultimately create new jobs for facmties construction, future development construction, the provision of publlc services for a larger population base, and to staff new business and operations associated with the specific plan. 6. Improvements to local roadways will occur that will increase veMcular efficIency and local access. 7. The City's economlc base will be enhanced through revenues derived from increased sales, tales, business licenses, and other fees, taxes, and exactions from new development. 8. The proposed project is more restrictive in its development density than what would have been permitted when the project site was under County jurisdiction. DOCLC.O5D BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#HiF GREEN EXHIBIT B" CEGA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF FACTS The California Environmental *uality Act CEOA) and the State CEQA Guidelines Guideine8) promulgated pursuant thereto provide: No pubic agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been completed and which identifies one or more significant effects of the project unless the pubic agency makes one or more of the following written findings for each of the significant effects, accompanied by a Statement of Facts supporting each finding. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EUL 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibmty and jurisdiction of another pubic agency and not the agency makg the finding. Such change. have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, soclai, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final Eli Section 15091) of the Guidelines), Because the proposed Spedfic Plan 94025 constitutes a project under CEOA and the Guidelines, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta has required an Environmental Impact Report *IR), This Eli has identified certain significant effects which may occur as a result of the project, or on a cumulative basis in conjunction with is project and other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Further, the City Council approves this project and, after determining that the Em is complete and has been prepared in accordance with CE(LA and the Guidelines, the findings set forth herein are made: EFFECTS DE'TE*NED TO BE INSIGNIFICANT Through preparation of the Initial Study *nvironmental Checllllst form), the City identified that implementation of the project would not have any significant adverse impacts on human health. This conclusion is based on the following: The project proposes the development of residential units and open space. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the areas to be developed. The project is not near a river or stream or other body of water. Air: The project will not alter the climate, either locally or regionally. no(*''o14 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi ii GREKN There are no bodies or water on the Bite. The project will not alter the direction or rate of flow of ground waters. There will not be a substantial reduction In public water supplies. Flooding hazards are not anticipated for the project ar.L There will be no reduction In agrlcultural lands. People will not be exposed to severe noise levels. RIIILftUIDHL The risk of explosion or release of a hazardous substance is not anticipated by this residential development. EIwli1at**li The Green project will not alter the existing human population In the areL The project will not effect existing housing as the site is vacant The project will have no effect on water-borne rail or air traffic as there is none on the site. Pubic Services There are no unanticipated impacts upon undesignated governmental services by this residential project. The project will not require the consumption of substantial amounts of fuel or energy for either construction or on-going operation There will not be a substantial Increase In demand upon existing sources of energy. There were no cultural resources observed on the project site during the archaeological survey of the property. DOCU.014 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi I I EXHIBIT C11 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED MID USE: The Green Specific Plan proposes land use8 that will reqUIre the following General Plan designation: Very Low Density Residential, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and Open Space. This project would not be consistent with the existing Open Space land use designation or the existing H-C Hillside Conservation) zoning designation of I dwelling unit per 10 acres. This is considered a significant impact. The project proposes 277 resort single fanilly homes on 94.1 acres, with densities ranging from Lototoperacre. The Green project will result in a significant cumulative land use impact as the projects do not meet all of the goals and policies of the General Plan- *in*ina; 1. The proposed project Is not consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan for the City of La *uinta. 2. The required general plan amendment will mitigate land use inconsistencies. 3. The conversion of open space to urban uses will remain a signlficant impact. 4. The unavoidable sig-ficant effect is acceptable when balanced against the facts set forth on the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. AIiLii[&UTL The prilnary impacts to air quality associated with the Green project implementation will occur from vehlcular.related emissions. Indirect impacts will occur from stationary sources, including increased electrical demand requiring combustion in power plants. The project air quality analysis indicates that the thresholds for N02 and PlilO will be exceeded during the construction phases of the project and is therefore significant. Indinun The proposed project will result in significant short term impacts to air quality. 2- Mitigation measures have been required for the project which will partially mitigate to the extent feasible the significant impacts. DOCLc.O*8 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi3 The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remalinng unavoidable significant effect. The proposed Green Specific Plan will contribute to cumulative impacts which remain significant after project-specific mitigation. The impacts to the groundwater supply due to the overdraft state of the lower aquifer is considered significant. Potential groudwater degradation could occur due to the creation of new wells drllled through non-potable water sources, urban runoff, and pesticides and fertilizers applied to landscape areas. This is considered a significant impact. Cumulative impacts to which this project will contribute to will result in reductions in the exi*ting underground water supply which is currentiy in a state of overdraft, and will require further dependence on out-of-state water supplies with the addition of the Green Specific Plan. Impacts to the water supply of the Coachella Valley are considered cumulatively significant. 1. The proposed project will result in cumulative water impacts on the water supply in the Coachella Valley. 2. Cumulative impacts remain significant due to the Coachela Valley's dry climate, exhaustible water supply, and increased dependency on imported water. 3. Potentially significant site disturbance impacts remain due to the unknown off site well and reservoir locations required by the proposed project. 4. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. rn The Green project would develop approximately 100 acres of the total 331-acre site. The loss of 100 acres of natural habitat in the Coachelia Valley is considered significant. Specific impacts to individual sensitive species including the removal of barrel cactus are considered significant. This project would eliminate habitat for on-site wildlife species, which are not considered sensitive species. However, this is considered a significant impact. The sensitive wildlife species on the Green site would be lost. The project would cause stress and disturbance to off-site bighorn sheep as a result of site preparation, construction, light, glare, noise, hikers, and domestic animals. This is considered a significant impact. No impacts to the desert tortoise would result irom development on the Green site, since no evidence of the species could be found on the project site. Sensitive bat species are considered likely to occupy rock overhangs or crevices on the hills and forage within the project site. This is a significant impact. DocI*.048 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi I *I* III II I The proposed project has the potential to impact the blueline stream course on-site due to construction activities. This is a significant impact. The incremental loss of Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub and Desert Dry Woodland plant and animal communities within the Coacheila Valley are considered cumulatively significant and unavoidable. 1. The taking or sensitive plants's reduced by mitigation but remain significant after mitigatioL 2. The loss of natural habitat on-site is considered significant and unavoidable impact. 3. Impacts to sensitive wildlife species present on-site have been reduced but remain significant after mitigatioL 4. Impacts to sensitive bat species can be lessened by implementation of the Habitat Conservation Plan but remains significant after mitigatioL 5. The incremental loss of natural habitat remains cumulatively significant and unavoidable. 6. The incremental loss of the Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub and Dese?1 Dry Woodland plant and animal communities within the Coachena Valley are considered cumulatively significant and unavoidable. 7. The remaling unavoidable significant effect's acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remallng unavoidable significant effect. PUBUC SERVICES AND UTIUTIES: The Green Specific Plan will have a significant impact upon the local schools. Students generated by the proposed project will add to the existing and anticipated overcrowded conditions at the schools that will serve the site. Additional travel-related costs will be incurred by the Coachella Valley Unified School District as a result of the increased traveling time and mileage associated with the project development. Cumulative impacts upon school facIlIties will result due to the existing state of overcrowding and the future increase of students generated by till. and other projects. 1. The proposed project will have a significant impact upon local school facIlIties. 2. Mitigation measures have been provided to reduce impacts to the extent feasible. 3. Project specific and cumulative impacts remain significant. DOCLC.048 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi L *. I Implementation of the Green Specific Plan will not result in a significant impact to electricity services. However, the proposed project in conjunction with the cumulative projects will result in a significant cumulative impact to electricity services. 1. Cumulative impacts remain significant on a growth inducing leveL 2. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. Implementation of the Green Specific Plan will result in an increase in demand for gas service8. This proj cci will have a significant cumulative impact on a growth inducing leveL *iiii'gi* 1. Cumulative impacts remain significant on a growth inducing leveL 2. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into this project which will partially mitigate to tile e*ent feasible. 3. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effects. SolidWaste: The Green project will represent a significant increase in solid waste at the cumulative leveL FIndlnv' 1. Mitigation measures will be incorporated into the proposed project that will partially mitigate significant impacts to the erlent feasible. 2. Cumulative impacts remain significant. 3. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. Docu.w BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi I MI *.`L EXHIBIT D" FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT ENIIIRONM*NTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGABLE TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION: The Green Specific Plan is expected to be built out by the Year 2000. The following intersections in the Year 2000 will operate at or below LOS D with or without the development of till. project or the neighboring Travertine project. Jefferson St.15Oth Avenue Jefferson St.*5211d Avenue Jefferson St.J54th Avenue The recommended mitigation measures will mitigate both the project specific and the cumulative traffic impacts to a less than significant leveL Findings: 1. Existing intersections will operate at or below LOS D in the Year 2000 with or without the development of the proposed project. 2. Mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval which will mitigate traffic impacts to a level of insignificance. NOISE: The Green Specific Plan will not generate cumulatively significant audible noise increases at any of the links analyzed. However, potentially audible cumulative noise increases are projected to occur at the following link.: Madison StttNorth of Airport Blvd. Madison SLINorth of 58th Avenue 54th AvenueIWest of Madison St. 58Ui AvenueIWest of Madison St. 58th AvenueIWest of Monroe St. Ilindings: 1. Potential audible noise is projected to occur at several link.. 2. Mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval that will redlice the impacts to a level of insignificance. DOCU.058 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi L *.. L u*i I WATER RESOURCES: The proposed project will utilize a CVWD generation factor of 1,500 gallonslper unltlper day for domestic water. Wastewater effluent would be sent via the proposed system to the MId-Valley Reclamation Nant for treatment. The Water District has indlcated that they have the capacity of servicing the site. Sewer service impacts are significant. However, mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval that will reduce those impacts to a level of insignificance. Findings: 1. Sewer service impacts are significant. 2. Mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval that will reduce these impacts to a level of insignificance. SOILSIGEOLOGYISEISMIC: The Green Specific Plan site is located on Myoma fine sand. Development on this site will not result in a significant impact from a soils and geology standpoint. Additionally. the site does not contain prime agricultural soils nor is it within the Coachelia Valley Blowsand RegioL Impacts to the Green project, from seismic events, are simiiar to that of the Travertine project. These impacts include ground ruptute, liquefaction, and landsliding. The Green site also consists of potential slide areas along proposed residential areas. Steep mountainous rock outcrops dominate approximately 200 acres of the project site. This is a potentially significant impact. Mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval to ensure a reduction of potential landslide hazards. lindings: 1. There is a potential hazard from landslides to the project. 2. Mitigation mearms will be incorporated into the project in order to mitigate this hazard to a level of insignificance. BIOLOGY: The Green projectwould develop approximately 100 acres of the total 331-acre site. The loss of 100 acres of natural habitat is considered significant valley-wide. Specific impacts to individual sensitive plant species, includlng the removal of barrel cactus are considered significant. The elimination of wildilfe habitat would occur on-site. The project would cause disturbance and stress to offsite bighorn sheep as a result of site preparation, construction, light, glare, noise, hikers, and domestic ailimals. This is considered a significant impact. The project has the potential to impact the blueline stream course on- site due to construction activities. This is a significant impact. Mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval that will mitigate the bighorn sheep and the bluehe stream to levels that are less than significant. nocu.056 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi I thE I III I Flnihgs: 1. Potential significant adverse impacts to the bighorn sheep have been identified as a result of development of the Green Specific Plan. 2. Potential significant adverse impacts to an on*site bineilne stream have been identified as a result of development of the project 3. MItigation measures will be required for this preject that will mitigate these impacts to a less than significant leveL RECREATION: At bulldout, the Green project would generate approximately 790 persons based on 2.85 persons per household which accounts for both permanent and seasonal residents. This project, together with other past, and fntrre projects will increase the utilization of parks and recreational faclilties in the City This Is a significant cumulative impact. Ilinding: 1. Cumulative impacts have been identified for this project on the City's recreation facilltieL 2. Mitigation measures will be made a part of this project approval that will mitigate adverse impacts on recreation facillties to a less than significant leveL PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES: Based on the number of housing units and population, the GreeD Specific Plan will require one fire defense facIlity and one pumper staffed with two persons. This is a significant impact. Cumulative development within the City of La quinta and the proposed Travertine and Green Speclllc Plans will ultimately affect fire protection services. Ilindings: 1. The proposed project will result in significant impacts to fire protection services. 2. These impacts will be mitigated through payment of fire mitigation fees to the City of La Qulita and the Riverside County Irre flepartment, and through complance with fire protection development requirements. The proposed specific plan will impact the existing hospital and medical center facilities. The development of this project and others will result in a need for additional medical serviceL However, DDCLC.058 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi IL * I the medical facilities affected continually forecast and anticipate growth In the area to ensure services commensurate with need. Findings: 1. The proposed project will impact the existing medical facilities. 2, No mitigation measures are proposed as these facilities anticipate growth In their facilities to provide services commensurate with the projected need. Th1*RIwnft: Implementation of tile Green and Tnvertine.projects will result In a substantial Increase In demand for telephone services. Necessary expansion of the on-site and off-site telephone lines shall be identified during the development planning stage for each project. The appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce any significant Impacts. *iudingi* 1. The proposed project will contribute to the cumulative impaetto telephone service in the proj eet areL 2. MItigation measures will be identified through coordination with the local telephone company to provide service and lessen any impact to a less than significant leveL CableService: The Green Specific Plan will result In an Increased demand for cable television services on the project specific leveL Necessary expansion of the on-site and off-site cable lines will be identified duling the development planning stages. The developer will coordinate the Installation of cable services with the local cable company. Findings: 1. The proposed project will result In an Increased demand for cable services. 2. Mitigation measures will be required that will mitigate the project specific and cumulative impacts to a level that is less than significant. DOCU.058 BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02 ^#Hi IL GREKN EXHIBIT E" FINDINGS CONCERNING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION Prior to recommending adoption of Specific Plan 94-025, the City Council has considered all of the alternatives presented in the Draft EIR and Final EIR and finds that the alternatives other than the preferred alternative are infeasible based on economic, environmental, and other considerations as set forth below. infeasiblitv of the Na Prolect Alternative" Implementation of this alternative assumes that the project site would remain in its current land use as vacant desert open space. This alternative would avoid the impacts associated with all of the Issue areas assessed by the Elit. Although the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative to the extent that only the natural environment is considered, it would also mean that the project's objectives would not be achieved and the 277 housing units would not be built. This would reduce the rilture housing supply in the City of La Quihta. Based on these considerations, the City Council finds that Alternative 1 is infeasible. Infeasibilltv of Alternative 2: Existinf General Plan Land Use" Alternative 2 would propose development of the project Bite utilizing the current General Plan land use designation of Open Space, with a permitted density of 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres. This would result in approximately 30 units that could be built on the project site. Implementation of this alternative would have fewer environmental impacts except for cultural resources, populationlhousinglemployment, risk of upset, and public serviceslutilities, which would have similar impact as the proposed project. The applicant's residential objective would only partially be realized under this alternative. Based on these considerations, the City Council finds that Alternative 2 is infeasible. Infeasibilltv of Alternative 3: Clustered Iwellln* Units" Alternative 3 for the Green Specific Plan would propose to cluster approximately 277 dwelling units. The clustered areas will help to avoid biologically sensitive areas. This alternative would result in fewer environmental impacts except for land use, soIls*geologyIseismic, hydrologylstermwater, cultural resources, populationhousinglemployment, risk of upset, and public serviceslutilities, which would have simllar impact as the proposed project. Based on these considerations, the City Council finds that Alternative 3 is infeasible. Docu:.o5: I BIB] 08-19-1998-U01 02:34:15PM-U01 ADMIN-U01 CCRES-U02 95-U02 36-U02