HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-04-05 STAFF REPORTS 1D Q pALM S,p
c
V N
4<lFORN�p CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: April 5, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT: CONTEMPO HOMES TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30350, SUBDIVIDING
AN APPROXIMATELY 11.42-ACRE PARCEL INTO 39 SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL LOTS, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF VERONA
ROAD, EAST OF WHITEWATER CLUB DRIVE
FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager
BY: Department of Planning Services
SUMMARY
The City Council will consider a proposed subdivision of an 11.42-acre parcel into 39
single-family residential lots, ranging in size between 7,926 and 14,421 square feet,
along with the environmental assessment and Negative Declaration for the project.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Open the public hearing and receive public testimony.
2. Adopt Resolution No. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 30350, FOR 39 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON AN
APPROXIMATELY 11.42-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
VERONA ROAD, EAST OF WHITEWATER CLUB DRIVE, ZONE R-1-D,
SECTION 6."
PRIOR ACTIONS:
On March 22, 2006, the project was reviewed by the Planning Commission which
adopted a favorable recommendation to City Council (by a vote of 5-0-2, two members
absent).
Item No. i . D .
CKy Council Staff Report
April 5,2006 -- Page 2
TT M 30350
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The proposed project is a Tentative Tract Map subdividing an approximately 11.42-acre
parcel into 39 single-family residential lots The project site is located within an area with
a General Plan designation of L6 Low Density Residential and a zoning designation of
R-1-D. The General Plan allows single-family homes at a density between three and six
dwelling units per acre, and the proposed density is 4.9 dwelling units per acre. For the
R-1-D zone, the Zoning Code provides for minimum lot sizes of 7,500 square feet, and
the proposed lots will range in size between 7,926 and 14,421 square feet. Future
homes must meet ordinary development standards for the R-1-D zone. Public streets
are proposed for the project with access from Verona Road and later Via Escuela.
A more detailed analysis can be seen in the attached Planning Commission Staff
Report dated March 22, 2006. Findings in support of approving the proposed
subdivision are included in the attached draft resolution of approval.
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, an Initial Study was conducted for
the proposed project. That study concluded that with the incorporation of proposed
mitigation measures, any potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from
this project will be reduced to a level of insignificance, and that a Mitigated Negative
Declaration can be adopted for the project. The mitigation measures are included in the
conditions of approval attached as Exhibit A to the draft resolution of approval.
FISCAL IMPACT: Finance Director Review:
No fiscal impact.
t J
C alg,X Eyeing, Ali Thomas Wilso Assistant City Manager
Director of Planr{ngervices
David H. Ready, City M9Ra_ga
Attachments:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Draft Resolution and Conditions of Approval
3. Reduced Copy of Proposed Subdivision
4. Draft Planning Commission Minutes 3/22/06
5. Planning Commission Staff report 3/22/06
6. Copy of Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
N
fi Department of Planning Services w E
� { � Vicinity Map
.o.
H \�
A
tY
H
VIA ESCUELA ¢ NORL8:F1 ST -
w
z
U U {wLl
Uj
Legend
Site
1= 500'R adiu e
VISTA CHINO
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO: Tentative Tract Map 30350 DESCRIPTION: Application by Contempo Homes to
subdivide an approximate 11.42 acre parcel into 39 single-
family residential lots ranging from 6,761 to 1.2,•973 square
APPLICANT: Contempo Homes feet in size at the south of Verona Road and west of Gene
Autry Trail, Zone R-1-D, Section 6. APN: 677-030-001.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 30350, FOR 39 SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON AN APPROXIMATELY 11.42-
ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
VERONA ROAD, EAST OF WHITEWATER CLUB DRIVE,
ZONE R-1-D, SECTION 6.
WHEREAS, Contempo Homes (the "Applicant") has filed an application with the City
pursuant to Section 9.62.010 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code, for Tentative Tract
Map 30350; and
WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Springs to consider Tentative Tract Map 30350 was given in accordance with applicable
law; and
WHEREAS, on March 22, 2006, a public hearing on the application for project was held
by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project is considered a "project' pursuant to the terms of the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and an Environmental Assessment has
been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review and comment
in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Planning
Commission has considered the effect of the proposed project on the housing needs of
the region, and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of residents
and available fiscal and environmental resources; and
WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to
consider Tentative Tract Map 30350 was given in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on April 5, 2006, a public hearing on the application for project was held by
the City Council in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the City Council
has considered the effect of the proposed project on the housing needs of the region,
and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of residents and
available fiscal and environmental resources; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence
presented in connection with the meeting on the project, including but not limited to the
:staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented.
Resolution No.
Page 2
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been completed in
compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's CEQA Guidelines.
The City Council finds that with the incorporation of proposed mitigation measures,
potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from this project will be reduced
to a level of insignificance. The City Council has independently reviewed and
considered the information contained in the MND prior to its review of this Project and
the MND reflects the City Councils independent judgment and analysis.
Section 2: Pursuant to Section 66474 of the Subdivision Map Act, the City Council
makes the following findings:
a. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with all applicable general and
specific plans.
The proposed Tentative Map is consistent with the goals and objective of the L-6
(Low Density Residential), General Plan designation which governs the subject
property as well as all property adjacent to the subject site. The applicant is
proposing 39 residential lots on an approximately 11.42-acre parcel; this
proposal is within the density parameters of the General Plan.
b. The design and improvements of the proposed Tentative Tract Map are
consistent with the zone in which the property is located.
The proposed project is consistent with the zoning designation of R-1-D, which
allows the development of a single-family residence on each lot at the proposed
location. The proposed subdivision and the provision for its design and
improvements comply with the applicable development standards for streets and
lot design.
C. The site is physically suited for this type of development.
The project site is relatively flat and each lot contains adequate developable
building area. There are no known bodies of water, ravines, or significant
topographic features on the subject property.
d. The site is physically suited for the proposed density of development.
The General Plan Designation of L-6 establishes a threshold density of three
dwelling units per acre and a maximum of six dwelling units per acre. The
proposed density of approximately 4.9 dwelling units per net acre is within the
allowable range of density. Thus the site is physically suited for the number of
proposed number of lots, and the density of the subdivision is consistent with the
General Plan.
Resolution No.
Page 3
e. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or their habitats.
The Environmental Initial Study prepared for the site determined that the project
is adjacent to existing residential uses located to the west of the project site.
With the implementation of proposed mitigation measures, any environmental
impacts affecting animals or plan will be mitigated to a level of less than
significant. As stated earlier, there are no known bodies of water on the subject
property and therefore no fish will be disturbed.
if. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious
public health problems.
The design of the proposed subdivision includes the provision of public water and
sewer systems, a drainage design that protects home sites while providing water
quality basins, and a street system which is consistent with City Standards.
g. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the
property within the proposed subdivision.
There are no known public easements across the subject property; therefore, the
design of the subdivision will not conflict with any public easements for access
through or use of the property. The applicant is required to dedicate necessary
easements for public access and circulation in and around the new subdivision.
Section 3: The City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative
'Tract Map 30350, and directs staff to file the associated Notice of Determination.
Section 4.: The City Council approves Tentative Tract Map 30350.
,ADOPTED THIS 5th day of April, 2006.
David H. Ready, City Manager
,ATTEST:
James Thompson, City Clerk
�,�,P-PC;
Resolution No.
Page 4
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
Resolution No. is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on March 15t 2006, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Tract Map 30350 (Contempo Homes)
APN: 677-030-001
April 5, 2006
South Side of Verona Road, East of Whitewater Club Drive
Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning Services, the Chief of Police,
the Fire Chief or their designee, depending on which department recommended the
condition.
Any agreements, easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form
approved by the City Attorney.
PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
Administrative
1. The proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable
regulations of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, or any other
City Codes, ordinances and resolutions which supplement the zoning district
regulations.
2. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Springs, its
agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the
City of Palm Springs or its agents, officers or employees to attach, set aside, void
or annul, an approval of the City of Palm Springs, its legislative body, advisory
agencies, or administrative officers concerning Case 5.0866-13 Tentative Tract
Map 31525. The City of Palm Springs will promptly notify the applicant of any
such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs and the
applicant will either undertake defense of the matter or pay the City's associated
legal costs or will advance funds to pay for defense of the matter by the City
Attorney. If the City of Palm Springs fails to promptly notify the applicant of any
such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the
applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold
harmless the City of Palm Springs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains
the right to settle or abandon the matter without the applicant's consent but should
it do so, the City shall waive the indemnification herein, except, the City's decision
to settle or abandon a matter following an adverse judgment or failure to appeal,
shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights herein.
3. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall
maintain and repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks,
0017,31
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 2
bikeways, parkways, parking areas, landscape, irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and
fences between the curb and property line, including sidewalk or bikeway
easement areas that extend onto private property, in a first class condition, free
from waste and debris, and in accordance with all applicable law, rules, ordinances
and regulations of all federal, state, and local bodies and agencies having
jurisdiction at the property owner's sole expense. This condition shall be included
in the recorded covenant agreement for the property if required by the City.
4. The project is located in an area defined as having an impact on fish and wildlife
as defined in Section 711.4 of the Fish and Game Code; therefore a fee of
$1,314.00 plus an administrative fee of $50.00 shall be submitted by the applicant
in the form of a money order or a cashier's check payable to the Riverside County
Clerk prior to Council action on the project. This fee shall be submitted by the City
to the County Clerk with the Notice of Determination. Action on this application
shall not be final until such fee is paid.
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Fringe Toed Lizard Mitigation fees shall be
submitted.
6. This project shall be subject to Chapters 2.24 and 3.37 of the Municipal Code
regarding public art. The project shall either provide public art or payment of an in
lieu fee. In the case of the in-lieu fee, the fee shall be based upon the total
building permit valuation as calculated pursuant to the valuation table in the
Uniform Building Code, the fee being 1/2% for commercial or industrial projects,
1/4% for new residential subdivisions, or 1/4% for new individual single-family
residential units constructed on a lot located in an existing subdivision with first
$100,000 of total building permit valuation for individual single-family units exempt.
Should the public art be located on the project site, said location shall be reviewed
and approved by the Director of Planning Services and the Public Arts
Commission, and the property owner shall enter into a recorded agreement to
maintain the art work and protect the public rights of access and viewing.
7. Pursuant to Park Fee Ordinance No. 1632 and in accordance with Government
Code Section 66477 (Quimby Act), all residential development shall be required to
contribute to mitigate park and recreation impacts such that, prior to issuance of
residential building permits, a parkland fee or dedication shall be made.
Accordingly, all residential development shall be subject to parkland dedication
requirements and/or park improvement fees. The parkland mitigation amount shall
be based upon the cost to acquire and fully improve parkland. The applicant shall
submit a property appraisal to the Planning Services Department for the purposes
of calculating the Park Fee. The Park Fee payment and/or parkland dedication
shall be completed prior to the issuance of building permits.
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 3
Environmental Assessment
8. The mitigation measures of the environmental assessment shall apply. The
applicant shall submit a signed agreement that the mitigation measures outlined
as part of the mitigated negative declaration will be included in the Planning
Commission consideration of the environmental assessment. Mitigation
measures are as follows:
MM 2-1 Prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy, the project
proponent shall comply with the traffic improvement mitigation
requirements set forth in Appendix A, Draft Traffic Impact Analysis,
Contempo Homes (Alexander Village and Vista Estates by LOS
Engineering, dated January 27, 2005. The measures are
summarized below: (Transportation / Circulation)
a. The project shall install a traffic signal at the Gene Autry Trail
/ Via Escuela intersection, the cost of which shall be
reimbursed by other developments required to pay a fair
share contribution for this signal.
b. The northbound and southbound approaches to the Gene
Autry Trail / Via Escuela intersection shall have left turn
lanes and combination through-right turn lanes.
C. On-site traffic signing / striping shall be implemented in
conjunction with detailed construction plans for the proposed
project site.
d. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, sight distance at the
project access shall be reviewed with respect to standard
Caltrans sight distance standards.
MM 3-1 To the extent feasible, the project contractor shall use the following
equipment to reduce and methods to reduce construction
emissions: (Air Quality)
a. To mitigate for off-road mobile source emissions (Table 11-3
of SCAQMD CEQA Hankbook):
• Use of methane-fueled pile drivers;
• Use of electricity from power poles rather than
temporary diesel or gasoline power generators;
• Use of methanol or natural gas on-site mobile
equipment instead of diesel; and
• Use of propane- or butane-powered on-site mobile
equipment instead of gasoline.
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 4
b. To mitigate for PMto Emissions related to Grading:
• Apply non-toxic soil stabilizers according to
manufacturers' specifications to all inactive
construction areas (previously graded areas inactive
for ten days or more).
• Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly
as possible.
• Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic
soils binders according to manufacturers'
specifications, to exposed piles (i.e., gravel, sand,
dirt) with five percent or greater silt content.
• Water active sites at least twice daily.
• Suspend all excavating and grading operations when
wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mile
per hour.
• Monitor for particulate emissins according to
SCAQMD District-specified procedures. Contract the
District for more information at 714-396-3600.
C. To mitigate for PM10 Emissions related to Paved Roads:
• Sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil
material is carried onto adjacent public paved roads
(recommend water sweepers with reclaimed water).
• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit
unpaved roads onto paved roads, or wash off trucks
and equipment leaving the site each trip.
d. To mitigate for PMto Emissions related to Unpaved Roads:
• Apply water three times daily, or non-toxic soil
stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications,
to all unpaved parking or staging areas or unpaved
road surfaces.
• Traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to be reduced to
fifteen miles per hour or less.
• Pave construction roads that have a traffic volume of
more than 50 daily trips by construction equipment,
150 total daily trips for all vehicles.
• Pave all construction access roads at least 100 feet
on to the site from the main road.
• Pave construction roads that have a daily traffic
volume of less than 50 vehicle trips.
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 5
MM 3-2 The following measures from the District's Rule 403, Table 1, Best
Available control Measures (Applicable to All construction Activity)
shall also be implemented: (Air Quality)
a. Stabilize backfill material during handling and at completion
of activity.
b. Pre-water soils prior to cut and fill activities.
C. Stabilize wind erodible surfaces to reduce dust.
d. Stabilize surface soils where support equipment and
vehicles will operate.
e. Stabilize disturbed soils throughout the construction site.
f. Pre-apply water and re=apply water as necessary to
maintain soils during earth=moving activities. Visible
emissions shall not exceed 100 feet in any direction.
g. Maintain at least six feet of freeboard on haul vehicles.
h. Stabilize stockpiled soils.
i. Limit vehicular travel to established unpaved roads (haul
routes) and unpaved parking lots.
MM 4-1 All construction vehicles or equipment, fixed or mobile, operated
within 1,000 feet of a dwelling shall be equipped with property
operating and maintained mufflers. This requirement shall be
included on the contractor specifications and shall be verified by the
Planning Director. (Noise)
MM 4-2 Stockpiling and/or vehicle staging areas shall be located on-site
and as far as practical from sensitive noise receptors (i.e.,
residential homes located south and east of the project). This
requirement shall be included in the contractor specifications and
shall be verified by the Planning Director. (Noise)
MM 11-1 In conjunction with Tentative Tract Maps 33443 and 33623, pay the
$800 per acre mitigation fee to the Tribe for 36 acres of habitat that
will be impacted by the three-subdivision project that may be
occupied by the federally endangered fringe-toed lizard and other
species of concern including: the flat-tailed horned lizard, Palm
Springs ground squirrel, Palm Springs pocket mouse; species of
concern that have a lower likelihood of onsite occurrence, including
burrowing owl and black tailed gnatcatcher and SNPS-sensitive
chaparral sand verbena that does occur on the site and slender
wooly heads, if it occurs there now or may in the future. (Biological
Resources)
MM 11-2 Conduct pre-construction surveys for burrowing owls within 48
hours of construction and have a qualified biologist remove them, if
t"'`� 04
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Paige 6
found, and collapse burrows to prevent re-occupation. (Biological
Resources)
MM 11-3 Conduct pre-construction live trapping for burrowing mammals 48
hours in advance of grading to remove burrowing animals that may
otherwise be entombed and to obtain better data on potentially
occurring species. (Biological Resources)
MM 11-4 Refrain from storing soils or building materials on-site in an
unconfined manner that would attract burrowing species. Stored
soil shall be covered and weighted to prevent wildlife intrusion.
spoils from development shall be removed to prevent potential
attraction of sensitive species. (Biological Resources)
MM 12-1 Archaeological monitoring of earth-disturbing activities shall be
done by a qualified archaeologist and tribal appointed monitor in
compliance with the tribal Historic Preservation Office. (Cultural
and Historic Resources)
MM 12-2 In the event that cultural resources are located during grading
activities on the 23 acres of tribal land related to this project,
construction must be halted in the vicinity of the find and the BIA
Regional Archaeologist and project archaeologist shall be notified.
If cultural resources are located during grading activities on the
eleven acres of non-reservation (fee land), construction activities
must be halted in the vicinity of the find and the project
archaeologist shall be notified. Work should not proceed in the
area of the find, but rather be redirected, if possible, until a qualified
archaeologist has been consulted to determine the significance of
the find. The City of Palm Springs General Plan Historic element
policy 5b/16 includes the requirement "...if archaeological resources
are uncovered during grading for any project within the planning
area, the building contractor shall stop grading immediately. The
contractor shall notify the City and shall summon a qualified
archaeologist to determine the significance of uncovered resources
and specify appropriate mitigation." (Cultural and Historic
Resources)
9. The developer shall reimburse the City for the City's costs incurred in monitoring
the developer's compliance with the conditions of approval and mitigation
monitoring program, including, but not limited to inspections and review of
developers operations and activities for compliance with all applicable dust and
noise operations, and cultural resource mitigation. This condition of approval is
supplemental and in addition to normal building permit and public improvement
permits that may be required pursuant to the Palm Springs Municipal Code.
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 7
CC&R's
10. The applicant prior to issuance of building permits shall submit three (3) sets of a
draft declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions ("CC&R's") to the
Director of Planning Services for approval in a form to be approved by the City
Attorney, to be recorded prior to certificate of occupancy. The CC&Rs shall be
submitted with a list of the adopted conditions of approval and an indication of
where applicable conditions are addressed in the CC&Rs. The CC&R's shall be
enforceable by the City, shall not be amended without City approval, shall require
maintenance of all property in a good condition and in accordance with all
ordinances.
11. The applicant shall submit to the City of Palm Springs, a deposit in the amount of
$2000, for the review of the CC&R's by the City Attorney. A filing fee, in
accordance with the fee schedule adopted by the City Council, shall also be paid
to the City Planning Services Department for administrative review purposes.
Public Safety CFD
12. The Project will bring a significant number of additional residents to the community.
The City's existing public safety and recreation services, including police
protection, criminal justice, fire protection and suppression, ambulance, paramedic,
and other safety services and recreation, library, cultural services are near
capacity. Accordingly, the City may determine to form a Community Services
District under the authority of Government Code Section 53311 et seq, or other
appropriate statutory or municipal authority. Developer agrees to support the
formation of such assessment district and shall waive any right to protest, provided
that the amount of such assessment shall be established through appropriate
study and shall not exceed $500 annually with a consumer price index escalator.
The district shall be formed prior to sale of any lots or a covenant agreement shall
be recorded against each parcel, permitting incorporation of the parcel in the
district.
Cultural Resource — THPO
Here are the standard conditions of approval from the Tribal Historic Preservation
Office:
1. Based on the project location within the Traditional Use Area, the Agua
Caliente THPO requests copies of any cultural resource documentation that
might be generated in connection with these efforts for permanent inclusion in
the Agua Caliente Cultural Register.
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 8
2. Experience has shown that there is always a possibility of encountering
buried cultural resources during construction related excavations. Given that,
the Tribe requests that an Approved Cultural Resource Monitor(s) be present
during any survey and/or any ground disturbing activities. Should buried
cultural deposits be encountered, the Monitor may request that destructive
construction halt and the Monitor shall notify a Qualified (Secretary of the
Interior's Standards and Guidelines) Archaeologist to investigate and, if
necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic
Preservation Officer and the Agua Caliente THPO. Please contact our offices
for further information about Approved Cultural Resource Monitors.
ENGINEERING / PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
STREETS
1. Any improvements within the public right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs
Encroachment Permit.
2. Submit street improvement plans prepared by a registered California civil
engineer to the Engineering Division. The plan(s) shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits.
VERONA ROAD
3. Dedicate a right-of-way of 37 feet along the entire frontage, together with
property line - corner cut backs at the southeast and southwest corners of
Rosewood Drive and Verona Road in accordance with City of Palm Springs
Standard Drawing No. 105.
4. Dedicate right-of-way as necessary for the partial street "knuckle" at the
intersection of Verona Road and Kitnick Lane in accordance with City of Palm
Springs Standard Drawing No. 104,
5. Dedicate an easement 2 feet wide along the back of all driveway approaches for
sidewalk purposes.
6. Construct a 6 inch curb and gutter, 18 feet south of centerline, with 25 feet radius
curb returns and spandrels at the southeast and southwest corners of Rosewood
Drive and Verona Road, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard,
Drawings No. 200 and 206; and construct a 6 inch curb and gutter throughout the
partial street "knuckle" at the intersection of Verona Road and Kitnick Lane in
wit
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 9
accordance in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawings No. 104
and 200.
7. Remove and replace existing curb and gutter on Verona Road between
Whitewater Club Drive and the west Tract boundary as necessary to transition
from the end of existing street improvements to proposed street improvements,
as required by the City Engineer.
8. Construct driveway approaches in accordance with City of Palm Springs
Standard Drawing No. 201.
9. Construct a 5 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the south side of Verona
Road in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210.
10. Construct Type A curb ramps meeting current California State Accessibility
standards at the southeast and southwest corners of the intersection of
Rosewood Drive and Verona Road in accordance with City of Palm Springs
Standard Drawing No. 212.
11. Remove and replace existing pavement on Verona Road located between
Whitewater Club Drive and the west Tract boundary with a minimum pavement
section of 2'/z inches asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inches crushed
miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative
compaction, or equal, between the existing concrete gutters on both sides of
Verona Road in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No.
110. If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement
section shall be designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using
"R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval.
12. Construct a minimum pavement section of 2'/z inches asphalt concrete pavement
over 4 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24
inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, between the proposed gutter on the
south side of Verona Road to 12 feet north of centerline in accordance with City
of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110. If an alternative pavement section is
proposed, the proposed pavement section shall be designed by a California
registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the project site and
submitted to the City Engineer for approval.
13. Install a redwood header along the new edge of pavement located 12 feet north
of centerline.
ROSEWOOD DRIVE, ZANDER ROAD, KITNICK LANE, AND JIMMYS ROAD
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 10
14. Dedicate a right-of-way of 50 feet, together with property line - corner cut backs
at corners of each intersection in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard
Drawing No. 105.
15. Dedicate an easement 2 feet wide along the back of all driveway approaches for
sidewalk purposes.
16. Construct 6 inch curb and gutter, 18 feet from centerline along both sides of the
internal public streets, with 25 feet radius curb returns and spandrels at all street
intersections, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200
and 206.
17. Construct 6 feet wide cross-gutter across the intersection of Rosewood Drive
with Zander Road and Jimmys Road with a flowline 18 feet east of and parallel
with the centerline of Rosewood Drive; and construct a 6 feet wide cross-gutter
across the intersection of Kitnick Lane with Zander Road and Jimmys Road with
a flowline 18 feet west of and parallel with the centerline of Kitnick Lane, in
accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200 and 206.
18. Construct all driveway approaches in accordance with City of Palm Springs
Standard Drawing No. 201.
19. Construct a 5 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the frontage of all internal
public streets in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No.
210.
20. Construct a Type A curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility
standards at all internal public street intersections in accordance with City of
Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 212.
21. Construct a minimum pavement section of 2'Y2 inches asphalt over 4 inches
crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95%
relative compaction, or equal, within all internal public streets in accordance with
City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110 and 300. If an alternative
pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section shall be designed
by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the
project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval.
OFF-SITE SECONDARY EMERGENCY ACCESS
22. If not already obtained, the applicant shall be required to obtain a public
easement for emergency access with the right of ingress and egress of service
and emergency vehicles "without limitation as to tenure" across the property
identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032, as necessary to provide
secondary emergency access from Via Escuela to the subject property, as
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 11
required by the City Engineer and Fire Marshall. The public access easement
shall be approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and recorded with the Riverside
County Recorder prior to approval of a final map or issuance of grading permit.
23. The applicant shall be responsible for compliance with all Bureau of Indian Affairs
(B.I.A.) requirements, including payment of any BIA fees, obtaining appraisals
and payment of just compensation to the underlying owner associated with
acquisition of the public access easement across the property identified by
Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032. It is the applicant's responsibility to
determine what additional costs or other requirements may be necessary to
obtain the required public access easement.
24. If not already constructed by others, the applicant shall construct a minimum 20
feet wide secondary emergency access road, with a minimum pavement section
of 2'/2 inches asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inches crushed miscellaneous
base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or
equal. The secondary emergency access road shall extend from Via Escuela to
the subject property, as required by the City Engineer and Fire Marshall.
215. Upon completion of the secondary emergency access road across the property
identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032, and as a condition of
acceptance of the access road by the City Engineer, the applicant shall prepare
for the City Engineer's approval an Affidavit of Completion in accordance with
Section 169.16, Title 25, of the Code of Federal Regulations, for the public
improvements constructed by the applicant for which an easement was
dedicated to the City through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Affidavit of
Completion shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final
acceptance of the public improvements, including issuance of a final certificate of
occupancy. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary form
for the Affidavit of Completion from the Palm Springs Agency of the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, and for having it completed as necessary by the applicant's
Engineer of Record.
SANITARY SEWER
26. All sanitary facilities shall be connected to the public sewer system. New laterals
shall not be connected at manholes.
27'. Submit sewer improvement plans prepared by a California registered civil
engineer to the Engineering Division. The plans shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to issuance of any building permits.
28. Construct an 8 inch V.C.P. sewer main across all internal public street frontages
located 5 feet from centerline as required by the City Engineer. All sewer mains
constructed by the applicant and to become part of the public sewer system shall
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 12
be televised prior to acceptance of the sewer system for maintenance by the
City. Sewers shall be installed and accepted prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
29. If not already obtained, the applicant shall be required to obtain public sewer
easements "without limitation as to tenure" across the property identified by
Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032, as necessary to extend sanitary sewer
service to the subject property, as required by the City Engineer. The public
sewer easements shall be approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and recorded
with the Riverside County Recorder prior to approval of a final map or issuance
of a grading permit.
30. The applicant shall be responsible for compliance with all Bureau of Indian Affairs
(B.I.A.) requirements, including payment of any BIA fees, obtaining appraisals
and payment of just compensation to the underlying owner associated with
acquisition of public sewer easements across the property identified by
Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032. It is the applicant's responsibility to
determine what additional costs or other requirements may be necessary to
obtain the required public sewer easements.
31. Upon completion of the public sewer system extension across the property
identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032, and as a condition of
acceptance of the public sewer system by the City Engineer, the applicant shall
prepare for the City Engineer's approval an Affidavit of Completion in accordance
with Section 169.16, Title 25, of the Code of Federal Regulations, for the public
sewer improvements constructed by the applicant for which an easement was
dedicated to the City through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Affidavit of
Completion shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final
acceptance of the public sewer improvements, including issuance of a final
certificate of occupancy. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the
necessary form for the Affidavit of Completion from the Palm Springs Agency of
the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and for having it completed as necessary by the
applicant's Engineer of Record.
32. If not already completed by others, the applicant shall design and construct an
extension of the public sewer main within Gene Autry Trail, from Vista Chino to
Via Escuela; within Via Escuela located 5 feet from centerline, from Gene Autry
Trail to a point opposite the southerly extension of the west Tract boundary; and
across the property identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032 as
necessary to extend sanitary sewer service to the subject property, as approved
by the City Engineer. The applicant shall obtain approval from the City Engineer
of the location of proposed sewer main extensions within Gene Autry Trail to
avoid conflicts with planned Gene Autry Trail widening improvements to be
constructed by the City in the future. Construction of the extension of the
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 13
sanitary sewer system to the subject property shall be completed prior to
issuance of a building permit.
33. The applicant shall be required to obtain State permits and approval of plans for
sewer construction performed within Vista Chino (State Highway 111) right-of-
way. A copy of an approved Caltrans encroachment permit shall be provided to
the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any building permits.
34. The applicant shall coordinate construction of the sanitary sewer extension within
Gene Autry Trail and Via Escuela such that the sewer construction precedes
construction of the planned Gene Autry Trail widening improvements (City
Project No. 02-03) by the City. In the event the applicant has not completed
construction of the sanitary sewer extension within Gene Autry Trail and Via
Escuela prior to the City's approval of construction documents for bidding of City
Project No. 02-03, the applicant shall be responsible for coordinating construction
of the sanitary sewer extension as a part of City Project No. 02-03, which shall be
completed by the City. The applicant shall be required to deposit an amount
representing the City Engineer's estimate of the cost to construct the sanitary
sewer extension within Gene Autry Trail and Via Escuela within 10 days notice
from the City Engineer, and shall be required to deposit additional amounts as
necessary to cover the awarded construction contract cost of the sanitary sewer
extension, and any required contract change orders during construction of the
sanitary sewer extension within Gene Autry Trail and Via Escuela, upon 10 days
notice from the City Engineer. The applicant shall be required to enter into an
agreement establishing the terms and obligations of the applicant and the City in
coordinating construction of the applicant's required sanitary sewer extension as
a part of City Project No. 02-03 by the City.
35. Costs associated with design and construction of the off-site sewer extension
within Gene Autry Trail, from Vista Chino to Via Escuela, may be reimbursed,
pursuant to a Sewer Reimbursement Agreement approved by the City Council in
accordance with the policies established by Resolution 13773, and amended by
Resolution 15975. Following completion and acceptance of the off-site sewer
extension by the City Engineer, if reimbursement is requested in writing by the
applicant, the applicant shall submit a formal request for preparation of a Sewer
Reimbursement Agreement with a $2,500 deposit for City staff time associated
with the preparation of the Sewer Reimbursement Agreement, including City
Attorney fees. The applicant shall be responsible for payment of all associated
staff time and expenses necessary in the preparation and processing of the
Sewer Reimbursement Agreement with the City Council, and shall submit
additional deposits as necessary when requested by the City, which are included
in the amount that may be reimbursed to the applicant through the Sewer
Reimbursement Agreement. The Sewer Reimbursement Agreement is subject to
the City Council's review and approval at a Public Hearing, and its approval is not
guaranteed nor implied by this condition.
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 14
GRADING
36. Submit a Grading Plan prepared by a California registered civil engineer to the
Engineering Division for review and approval. The Grading Plan shall be
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permit.
a. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and/or its
grading contractor and submitted to the Engineering Division for review and
approval. The applicant and/or its grading contractor shall be required to
comply with Chapter 8.50 of the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, and
shall be required to utilize one or more "Coachella Valley Best Available
Control Measures" as identified in the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control
Handbook for each fugitive dust source such that the applicable performance
standards are met. The applicant's or its contractor's Fugitive Dust Control
Plan shall be prepared by staff that has completed the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (AQMD) Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control
Class. The applicant and/or its grading contractor shall provide the
Engineering Division with current and valid Certificate(s) of Completion from
AQMD for staff that have completed the required training. For information on
attending a Fugitive Dust Control Class and information on the Coachella
Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook and related "PM10" Dust Control
issues, please contact AQMD at (909) 396-3752, or at www.AQMD.gov. A
Fugitive Dust Control Plan, in conformance with the Coachella Valley Fugitive
Dust Control Handbook, shall be submitted to and approved by the
Engineering Division prior to approval of the Grading plan.
b. The first submittal of the Grading Plan shall include the following information:
a copy of final approved conformed copy of Conditions of Approval; a copy of
a final approved conformed copy of the Tentative Tract Map; a copy of current
Title Report; a copy of Soils Report; and a copy of the associated Hydrology
Study/Report.
37. The applicant shall obtain approvals to perform off-site grading from the record
owners of the adjacent properties identified by Assessor's Parcel Numbers 677-
030-019, 677-020-028, and 677-030-032. Approvals shall include, but not be
limited to, a right-of-entry and permanent slope easement, a maintenance and
joint use agreement, or other legally recognized approvals, subject to the review
and approval by the City Engineer and/or the City Attorney. Off-site approvals by
the adjacent property owners shall be required prior to approval of a grading
plan.
38. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks to keep
nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways, or gutters.
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 15
39. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit,
issued from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Phone No. 760-
346-7491) is required for the proposed development. A copy of the executed
permit shall be provided to the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading
permit.
40. In accordance with City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, Section 8.50.025 (c),
the applicant shall post with the City a cash bond of two thousand dollars
($2,000.00) per disturbed acre for mitigation measures for erosion/blowsand
relating to this property and development.
41. A soils report prepared by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer shall be
required for and incorporated as an integral part of the grading plan for the
proposed development. A copy of the soils report shall be submitted to the
Building Department and to the Engineering Division prior to approval of the
Grading Plan.
42. In cooperation with the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner and the
California Department of Food and Agriculture Red Imported Fire Ant Project,
applicants for grading permits involving a grading plan and involving the export of
soil will be required to present a clearance document from a Department of Food
and Agriculture representative in the form of an approved "Notification of Intent
To Move Soil From or Within Quarantined Areas of Orange, Riverside, and Los
Angeles Counties" (RIFA Form CA-1) prior to approval of the Grading Plan (if
required). The California Department of Food and Agriculture office is located at
73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert (Phone: 760-776-8208).
DRAINAGE
43. The applicant shall obtain public easements "without limitation as to tenure" for
storm drainage purposes for release of stormwater runoff from the public streets
within Tentative Tract Map 30350 across the property identified by Assessor's
Parcel Number 677-030-032 as necessary to convey on-site runoff to the
common retention basin located adjacent to the northwest corner of Via Escuela
and Gene Autry Trail proposed as part of Tentative Tract Map 33443 on the
property identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032, as described in
the Preliminary Hydrology Report for Tentative Tract No. 30350, prepared by The
Keith Companies, dated October 17, 2005 (as amended), and as required by the
City Engineer. The storm drainage easements shall be approved by the Bureau
of Indian Affairs and recorded with the Riverside County Recorder prior to
approval of a final map or issuance of grading permit.
44. The applicant shall be responsible for compliance with all Bureau of Indian Affairs
(B.I.A.) requirements, including payment of any BIA fees, obtaining appraisals
and payment of just compensation to the underlying owner associated with
0111 '1°`1`�r
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 16
acquisition of storm drainage easements across the property identified by
Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032. It is the applicant's responsibility to
determine what additional costs or other requirements may be necessary to
obtain the required storm drainage easements.
45. Upon completion of storm drainage improvements across the property identified
by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032, including construction of the
common retention basin located adjacent to the northwest corner of Via Escuela
and Gene Autry Trail proposed as part of Tentative Tract Map 33443 on the
property identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032, and as a condition
of acceptance of the storm drainage improvements by the City Engineer, the
applicant shall prepare for the City Engineer's approval an Affidavit of Completion
in accordance with Section 169.16, Title 25, of the Code of Federal Regulations,
for the improvements constructed by the applicant for which an easement was
dedicated to the City through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Affidavit of
Completion shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final
acceptance of the improvements, including issuance of a final certificate of
occupancy. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary form
for the Affidavit of Completion from the Palm Springs Agency of the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, and for having it completed as necessary by the applicant's
Engineer of Record.
46. All stormwater runoff passing through the site shall be accepted and conveyed
within the proposed public streets by surface drainage through curbs and gutters,
as approved by the City Engineer. Underground storm drain lines, catch basins,
and other subsurface drainage systems shall not be approved. For all
stormwater runoff falling on the site, retention or other facilities approved by the
City Engineer shall be required to contain the increased stormwater runoff
generated by the development of the property, as described in the Preliminary
Hydrology Report for Tentative Tract No. 30350, prepared by The Keith
Companies, dated October 17, 2005 (as amended). Final retention basin sizing
for the common retention basin located adjacent to the northwest corner of Via
Escuela and Gene Autry Trail proposed as part of Tentative Tract Map 33443 on
the property identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032, and other
specifications for construction of required off-site storm drainage improvements
shall be finalized in the Final Hydrology Report.
47'. This project may be required to install measures in accordance with applicable
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Best Management
Practices (BMP's) included as part of the NPDES Permit issued for the
Whitewater River Region from the Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB). The applicant is advised that installation of BMP's,
including mechanical or other means for pre-treating stormwater runoff, may be
required by regulations imposed by the RWQCB. It shall be the applicant's
responsibility to design and install appropriate BMP's, in accordance with the
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 17
NPDES Permit, that effectively intercept and pre-treat stormwater runoff from the
project site, prior to release to the City's municipal separate storm sewer system
("MS4"), to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the RWQCB. If required,
such measures shall be designed and installed on-site; and provisions for
perpetual maintenance of the measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer, including provisions in Covenants, Conditions, and
Restrictions (CC&R's) required for the development.
48. The applicant shall be responsible for preparation of flood control improvement
plans prepared by a California registered civil engineer subject to review and
approval by the Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District
(RCFC) for construction of storm drain improvements necessary to accept and
convey all existing off-site stormwater runoff entering the subject property from
Verona Road and from the vacant parcel north of the subject property (identified
by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-020-028) to the Whitewater River levee. The
storm drain improvement plans shall be approved by RCFC prior to approval of a
grading plan.
49. A storm drain easement shall be dedicated to the City across Lot 19 as
necessary to accommodate required storm drain improvements approved by
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (RCFC) for
conveyance of off-site stormwater runoff to the Whitewater River levee.
50. If the Final Hydrology Report demonstrates that the 100-year developed
stormwater runoff volume is not contained within the on-site public street rights-
of-way, easements for storm drainage purposes shall be dedicated to the City
adjacent to all on-site public street rights-of-way as required to contain the 100-
year stormwater runoff.
51. The applicant shall be required to enter into an agreement for the operation and
maintenance of off-site storm drainage easements, including the common
retention basin located adjacent to the northwest corner of Via Escuela and Gene
Autry Trail proposed as part of Tentative Tract Map 33443 on the property
identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032. The applicant shall be
responsible for costs associated with the maintenance of all off-site storm
drainage easements, including the common retention basin, either by depositing
sufficient funds to the City for the City Engineer's estimate for 5 years of
maintenance of the off-site storm drainage easements and the common retention
basin, or by creating a Home Owners Association (HOA) with provisions included
in Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the maintenance of the
off-site storm drainage easements and the common retention basin by the HOA
acceptable to the City Engineer.
GENERAL
conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 18
52. Any utility trenches or other excavations within existing asphalt concrete
pavement of off-site streets required by the proposed development shall be
backfilled and repaired in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard
Drawing No. 115. The developer shall be responsible for removing, grinding,
paving and/or overlaying existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets as
required by and at the discretion of the City Engineer, including additional
pavement repairs to pavement repairs made by utility companies for utilities
installed for the benefit of the proposed development (i.e. Desert Water Agency,
Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas Company, Time Warner,
Verizon, etc.). Multiple excavations, trenches, and other street cuts within
existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets required by the proposed
development may require complete grinding and asphalt concrete overlay of the
affected off-site streets, at the discretion of the City Engineer. The pavement
condition of the existing off-site streets shall be returned to a condition equal to or
better than existed prior to construction of the proposed development.
53. All proposed utility lines shall be installed underground.
54. In accordance with Chapter 8.04.401 of the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code,
all existing and proposed electrical lines of thirty-five thousand volts or less and
overhead service drop conductors, and all gas, telephone, television cable
service, and similar service wires or lines, which are on-site, abutting, and/or
transecting, shall be installed underground unless specific restrictions are shown
in General Orders 95 and 128 of the California Public Utilities Commission, and
service requirements published by the utilities. The existing overhead utilities
across the west and north property lines meet the requirement to be installed
underground. A detailed plan approved by the owners of the affected utilities
depicting all above ground facilities in the area of the project to be
undergrounded, shall be submitted to the Engineering Division prior to issuance
of a building permit. Undergrounding of existing overhead utility lines shall be
completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
55. All existing utilities shall be shown on the Grading Plan required for the project.
The existing and proposed service laterals shall be shown from the main line to
the property line.
56. Upon approval of any improvement plan by the City Engineer, the improvement
plan shall be provided to the City in digital format, consisting of a DWG
(AutoCAD drawing file) and DXF (AutoCAD ASCII drawing exchange file).
Variation of the type and format of the digital data to be submitted to the City may
be authorized, upon prior approval of the City Engineer.
57. The original improvement plans prepared for the proposed development and
approved by the City Engineer shall be documented with record drawing "as-
built' information and returned to the Engineering Division prior to issuance of a
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 19
certificate of occupancy. Any modifications or changes to approved improvement
plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to construction.
58. Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any
intersection or driveway which does or will exceed the height required to maintain
an appropriate sight distance per City of Palm Springs Zoning Code Section
93.02.00, D.
59. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public
sidewalk and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed per
City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 904.
MAP
60, A Final Map shall be prepared by a California registered Land Surveyor or
qualified Civil Engineer and submitted to the Engineering Division for review and
approval. A Title Report prepared for subdivision guarantee for the subject
property, the traverse closures for the existing parcel and all lots created
therefrom, and copies of record documents shall be submitted with the Final Map
to the Engineering Division as part of the review of the Map. The Final Map shall
be approved by the City Council prior to issuance of building permits.
611. Upon approval of a final map, the final map shall be provided to the City in G.I.S.
digital format, consistent with the "Guidelines for G.I.S. Digital Submission" from
the Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency." G.I.S.
digital information shall consist of the following data: California Coordinate
System, CCS83 Zone 6 (in U.S. feet); monuments (ASCII drawing exchange file);
lot lines, rights-of-way, and centerlines shown as continuous lines; full map
annotation consistent with annotation shown on the map; map number; and map
file name. G.I.S. data format shall be provided on a CDROM/DVD containing the
following: ArcGIS Geodatabase, ArcView Shapefile, Arclnfo Coverage or
Exchange file (e00), DWG (AutoCAD drawing file), DGN (Microstation drawing
file), and DXF (AutoCAD ASCII drawing exchange file). Variations of the type and
format of G.I.S. digital data to be submitted to the City may be authorized, upon
prior approval of the City Engineer.
62'. Abandonment of record easements across the property shall be performed in
conjunction with or prior to approval of a final map. An easement, identified as a
40 feet wide right-of-way easement approved on March 3, 1901 and filed with the
DLO and the Bureau of Indian Affairs shall be extinguished, quit-claimed,
relocated or abandoned to facilitate development of the subject property. The
record easement shall be extinguished, quit-claimed, relocated or abandoned to
facilitate development of the subject property. Without evidence of such,
proposed individual lots encumbered by the existing record easement are
Or'17S
conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 20
rendered unbuildable until such time as the easement is removed of record and
is not an encumbrance to the affected lots.
6:3. The applicant shall be required to enter into a Subdivision Improvement
Agreement with provisions associated with the acquisition of required off-site
public easements across the property identified by Assessor's Parcel Number
677-030-032; with provisions associated with the construction of the off-site
sanitary sewer extension within Gene Autry Trail and Via Escuela, and with
provisions associated with the operation and maintenance of off-site storm
drainage easements, including the common retention basin located adjacent to
the northwest corner of Via Escuela and Gene Autry Trail proposed as part of
Tentative Tract Map 33443 on the property identified by Assessor's Parcel
Number 677-030-032. The applicant shall be required to submit a $2,500
deposit for City staff time associated with the preparation of the Subdivision
Improvement Agreement, including City Attorney fees. The applicant shall be
responsible for payment of all associated staff time and expenses necessary in
the preparation and processing of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement, and
shall submit additional deposits as necessary when requested by the City. The
Subdivision Improvement Agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney and
executed by the applicant prior to approval of a final map.
conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 21
TRAFFIC
64. Based on the Alexander Vista Estates (for Tentative Tract Map 30350) and
Alexander Village (for Tentative Tract Maps 33443 and 33623) Traffic Analysis
Report prepared by Eilar Associates, dated April 28, 2005 (as revised), the
following mitigation measures shall be required:
a. The applicant shall pay a fair share percentage of 0.43% (or $650.00) for the
installation of a traffic signal at Gene Autry Trail and Via Escuela prior to
approval of a final map.
b. The applicant shall pay a fair share percentage of 0.97% (or $2,900.00) for a
future upgrade of the existing traffic signal, construction of a northbound right
turn lane, and an additional southbound left turn lane at the intersection of
Vista Chino and Farrell Drive prior to approval of a final map.
c. The applicant shall pay a fair share percentage of 1.13% (or $1,700.00) for
the installation of a traffic signal at Vista Chino and Whitewater Club Drive
prior to approval of a final map.
615. A minimum of 48 inches of clearance shall be provided on all public sidewalks for
handicap accessibility. Minimum clearance on public sidewalks shall be provided
by either an additional dedication of a sidewalk easement (if necessary) and
widening of the sidewalk along the Verona Road, Rosewood Drive, Zander Road,
Kitnick Lane, and Jimmys Road frontages of the subject property.
66. All damaged, destroyed, or modified pavement legends, traffic control devices,
signing, and striping associated with the proposed development shall be replaced
as required by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
67. Install a street name sign at each street intersection in accordance with City of
Palm Springs Standard Drawing Nos. 620 through 625.
68. Install a 30 inch stop sign, stop bar, and "STOP" legend for traffic in accordance
with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing Nos. 620-625 at the following
locations:
a. Northeast corner of Verona Road and Whitewater Club Drive
b. Southeast corner of Verona Road and Rosewood Drive
c. Northeast corner of Zander Road and Rosewood Drive
d. Southwest corner of Zander Road and Kitnick Lane
e. Northeast corner of Jimmys Road and Rosewood Drive
f. Southwest corner of Jimmy's Road and Kitnick Lane
;r�
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 22
69. Construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be provided for on all projects
as required by City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. As a minimum,
all construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be in accordance with State
of California, Department of Transportation, "Manual of Traffic Controls for
Construction and Maintenance Work Zones" dated 1996, or subsequent
additions in force at the time of construction.
70. This property is subject to the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee which shall
be paid prior to issuance of building permit.
Waste Disposal
1. Trash cans shall be screened from view and kept within fifty (50) feet of the
street.
Police Department
1. Developer shall comply with Article II of Chapter 8.04 of the Palm Springs
Municipal Code.
Building Department
1. Prior to any construction on-site, all appropriate permits must be secured.
FIRE
1. Construction Requirements: All Construction shall be in accordance with the
1998 California Fire Code, the 1997 Uniform Building Code, City of Palm Springs
Engineering requirements, City of Palm Springs Fire Protection Plan, Vol Il, City
of Palm Springs Ordinance 1570, Desert Water Agency specifications, NFPA
Standards plus UL and CSFM listings.
2. Streets and Fire Lanes: Street construction, widths, turning radius' and cul-de-
sacs shall be constructed in accordance with the 1998 California Fire Code,
Article 9, City of Palm Springs engineering standards, 1997 California Building
Code, and Palm Springs Ordinance 1570.
3. Fire Department Access: Minimum Fire Lane width shall be 20' unobstructed
per the 1998 California Fire Code, Article 9. Vertical clearance shall not be less
than 14'6".
4. Construction Site Fencing Required: Construction site fencing required for
new construction over 5,000 SF. Fencing shall remain intact until buildings are
stuccoed or covered and secured with lockable doors and windows or until the
Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 30350
Page 23
Fire Marshall deems necessary. Provide 14' wide access gates equipped with
changeable chains and locks.
5. Construction Site Guard: Construction site guard required for new construction
over 5,000 SF per City of Palm Springs Ordinance 1570. Guard to remain on
duty 24 hours a day, 7 days per week, as determined by the fire marshal.
6. Turning Radius: The outside turning radius of fire apparatus roads and Cul-de-
sac streets shall be at least 43' from centerline, inside turning radius required is
30' from centerline per the 1998 California Fire Code, Article 9 and City of Palm
Springs Ordinance 1570.
7. Fire Hydrants, Water Systems and Standpipes: Fire hydrants shall be
installed per NFPA standards, plus 1998 California Fire Code and DWA
standards. Where underground water mains are to be provided, they shall be
installed, completed and in service with fire hydrants and standpipes or
combinations thereof located as directed by this office, but not later than the time
when combustible materials are delivered to the construction site.
8. Water Agency Construction Specifications: All water mains, fire hydrants and
devices shall be installed in accordance with Desert Water Agency specifications
and standards.
9. Mandatory Fire Sprinklers: Automatic Fire Sprinkler System with 24 hours
monitoring is required per City of Palm Springs Fire Protection Master Plan Vol. II
and City of Palm Springs Ordinance 1570.
10. Fire Sprinkler Installation: Fire sprinklers shall be designed and installed per
NFPA 13 and 13D (Modified) by a state licensed C-16 Fire Sprinkler Contractor.
11. Further Comments: Further comments as conditions warrant.
END OF CONDITIONS
H\USERS\PLAMTTM 30350 Contempc Homes\CC 4.05.06\TTM 30350 COA-CC 04.05.06[PC Unchangedl.doc
WHDE4§4MR CLUB DRIVE
�PA4K E S I A�'6]Nb.
MAD. 36/121
7 �;7
_U.ml ou
'pz
zi
A T
LOT.
..... ....... ----------
60
74
U A 11 017
R-1
WwhhkhT.........
)ARDOR
N.—
Ol�ll kR9 1011 PRO Pill I
Ill
'hag. IT I'll No I
N
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Q ®RAFT DRAFT
March 22, 2006
Council Chambers, City Hall
3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Present: Cohen, Hutcheson, Ringlein, Roath, Shoenberger, Vice Chair
Hochanadel, and Chair Marantz.
Absent: None.
5. Case 30350 TTM - An application by Contempo Homes for a
Tentative Tract Map 30350 to subdivide an approximate 11.42 acre
parcel into 39 single family residential lots ranging from 7,926 to
14,421 square feet located south of Verona Road and east of
Whitewater Club Drive, Zone R-1-D, Section 6, APN 677-030-001.
Principal Planner, Edward Robertson, gave background information as outlined
in the staff report dated March 22, 2006. He indicated this tract is the 2nd
of three subdivisions proposed by the same applicant, as previously heard.
Marcus Fuller, Assistant Public Works Director, reported that all requirements for
City standards are being met for the local public streets.
Chair Hochanadel opened the Public Hearing.
Lance O'Donnell, O'Donnell Escalante Architects, gave further details regarding
the sidewalks, streets and curbs.
Henry Herbst, Palm Springs, owns a lot next to proposed project, voiced his
concern regarding the utility lines and the routing of construction vehicles.
There being no further comments, the Public Hearing was closed.
M/S/C (Roath/Cohen, 5-0, 2 absent/Shoenberger, and Chair Marantz) To
recommend adoption of the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of
TTM 33623 to City Council, subject to Conditions of Approval.
Chair Marantz and Commissionner Shoenberger re-entered the Council
Chamber at 3:06 p.m.
L. _ �� �;
4�pALM gp�
iy
O
J N
h h
'l ♦'D rt
* DR/DRI.I ED
Cq</FORN,P Planninq Commission Staff Report
Date: March 22, 2006
Case No.: TTM 30350
Application Type: Tentative Tract Map, to subdivide an approximately 11.42-
acre parcel into 39 single-family residential lots and four
lettered lots of streets and improvements
Location: South side of Verona Road, East of Whitewater Club Drive
Applicant: Contempo Homes
Zone: R-1-D (Single Family Residential)
General Plan: L-6 (Low Density Residential)
APN: APN: 677-030-001
From: Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services
Project Planner: Edward O. Robertson, Principal Planner
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is a Tentative Tract Map application (TTM 30350), and is a
request by Contempo Homes to subdivide an approximately 11.42-acre parcel into 39
single-family residential lots within an R-1-D zoned area. The residential lots will range
in size between 7,926 and 14,421 square feet. The subject property is located along
the south side of Verona Road, east of Whitewater Club Drive.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the Draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) and approval of the proposed tentative tract map to the City Council
subject to the attached findings and conditions of approval.
Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006
TfPA 30350
Page 2
BACKGROUND AND SETTING:
The proposed tentative tract map is a request for the creation of 39 new single-family
residential lots within an R-1-D zoning designation. The subject property is an
approximately 11.42-acre, relatively flat vacant parcel located along the south side of
Verona Road, east of Whitewater Club Drive. This subdivision is one of three abutting
subdivisions proposed by the project proponent.
Table 1: Surrounding land uses, General Plan, Zoning
Land Use General Plan Zoning
North Vacant L-6 OS
South Vacant L-6 R-1-D
East Vacant L-6 R-1-D
West Sin le-Faro Housin L-4 R-1-C
ANALYSIS:
The General Plan designation of the site is L-6 (low density residential), and the zoning
designation is R-1-D (single-family residential). The R-1-D district allows up to a
maximum of six dwelling units per net acre with a minimum lot size requirement of 7,500
square feet, with a minimum lot width of 75 feet, and minimum lot depth of 100 feet.
The proposed lot sizes will range from 7,926 to 14,421 square feet. The proposed
density is approximately 4.9 units per net acre, which is well below the maximum
density of six units per net allowed within the R-1-D district. The proposal complies with
the L-6 density, and the lots are consistent with the requirements of the zoning district in
terms of lot sizes, depth and width.
The primary access into the tract will be from Verona Road at the northwest corner of
the site. There are no existing public streets improvements around the subject property,
however all the proposed public streets and access within and around the site are
designed to meet the City's standards.
All lots proposed within this subdivision conform to the conventional rectangular-grid
type lot that is narrower than it is deep. Currently, the applicant is not proposing any
single-family residential development within the subdivision. The future housing units
will have to comply with the uses and development standards as outlined within the R-1-
D zone when proposed. Also, there are no perimeter walls or fences being proposed at
this time; the height of any future walls or fences must comply with the required
standards for single-family residential uses.
Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006
TTM 30350
Page 3
REQUIRED FINDINGS
Findings are required for the proposed subdivision pursuant to Section 66474 of the
Subdivision Map Act. These findings and a discussion of the project as it relates to
these findings follow:
a. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with all applicable general and
specific plans.
The proposed Tentative Map is consistent with the goals and objective of the L-6
(Low Density Residential), General Plan designation which governs the subject
property as well as all property adjacent to the subject site. The applicant is
proposing 39 residential lots on an approximately 11.42-acre parcel; this
proposal is within the density parameters of the General Plan.
b. The design and improvements of the proposed Tentative Tract Map are
consistent with the zone in which the property is located.
The proposed project is consistent with the zoning designation of R-1-D, which
allows the development of a single-family residence on each lot at the proposed
location. The proposed subdivision and the provision for its design and
improvements comply with the applicable development standards for streets and
lot design.
c. The site is physically suited for this type of development
The project site is relatively flat and each lot contains adequate developable
building area. There are no known bodies of water, ravines, or significant
topographic features on the subject property.
d. The site is physically suited for the proposed density of development.
The General Plan Designation of L-6 establishes a threshold density of three
dwelling units per acre and a maximum of six dwelling units per acre. The
proposed density of approximately 4.9 dwelling units per net acre is within the
allowable range of density. Thus the site is physically suited for the number of
proposed number of lots, and the density of the subdivision is consistent with the
General Plan.
e. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or their habitat.
The Environmental Initial Study prepared for the site determined that the project
is adjacent to existing residential uses to the southern and easterly portions of
the location. With the implementation of proposed mitigation measures, any
environmental impacts affecting animals or plan will be mitigated to a level of less
� yin
Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006
TrM 30360
Page 4
than significant. As stated earlier, there are no known bodies of water on the
subject property and therefore no fish will be disturbed.
f. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the proposed subdivision includes the provision of public water
and sewer systems, a drainage design that protects home sites while providing
water quality basins, and a street system which is consistent with City Standards.
g. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the
property within the proposed subdivision.
There are no known public easements across the subject property; therefore, the
design of the subdivision will not conflict with any public easements for access
through or use of the property. The applicant is required to dedicate necessary
easements for public access and circulation in and around the new subdivision.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines, an Initial Study was prepared and a Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration was sent to applicable agencies and published in the Desert Sun
for a 20-day review period.
The Mitigated Negative Declaration is attached to this report. The Mitigated Negative
Declaration found the environmental impacts of the proposed project to be less than
significant with the following mitigations:
Mitigation Measures:
MM 2-1 Prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy, the project proponent
shall comply with the traffic improvement mitigation requirements set forth
in Appendix A, Draft Traffic Impact Analysis, Contempo Homes (Alexander
Village and Vista Estates by LOS Engineering, dated January 27, 2005.
The measures are summarized below: (Transportation / Circulation)
a. The project shall install a traffic signal at the Gene Autry Trail / Via
Escuela intersection, the cost of which shall be reimbursed by other
developments required to pay a fair share contribution for this
signal.
b. The northbound and southbound approaches to the Gene Autry
Trail / Via Escuela intersection shall have left turn lanes and
combination through-right turn lanes.
i
Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006
TfM 30350
Page 5
C. On-site traffic signing / striping shall be implemented in conjunction
with detailed construction plans for the proposed project site.
d. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, sight distance at the
project access shall be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans
sight distance standards.
• MM 3-1 To the extent feasible, the project contractor shall use the following
equipment to reduce and methods to reduce construction emissions: (Air
Quality)
a. To mitigate for off-road mobile source emissions (Table 11-3 of
SCAQMD CEQA Hankbook):
• Use of methane-fueled pile drivers;
• Use of electricity from power poles rather than temporary diesel or
gasoline power generators;
• Use of methanol or natural gas on-site mobile equipment instead of
diesel; and
• Use of propane- or butane-powered on-site mobile equipment
instead of gasoline.
b. To mitigate for PMio Emissions related to Grading:
• Apply non-toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers'
specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded
areas inactive for ten days or more).
• Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
• Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic soils binders
according to manufacturers' specifications, to exposed piles (i.e.,
gravel, sand, dirt) with five percent or greater silt content.
• Water active sites at least twice daily.
• Suspend all excavating and grading operations when wind speeds
(as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mile per hour.
• Monitor for particulate emissins according to SCAQMD District-
specified procedures. Contract the District for more information at
714-396-3600.
C. To mitigate for PM10 Emissions related to Paved Roads:
• Sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried
onto adjacent public paved roads (recommend water sweepers with
reclaimed water).
• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads
onto paved roads, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site
each trip.
Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006
TTM 30350
Page 6
d. To mitigate for PMIo Emissions related to Unpaved Roads:
• Apply water three times daily, or non-toxic soil stabilizers according
to manufacturers' specifications, to all unpaved parking or staging
areas or unpaved road surfaces.
• Traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to be reduced to fifteen miles
per hour or less.
• Pave construction roads that have a traffic volume of more than 50
daily trips by construction equipment, 150 total daily trips for all
vehicles.
• Pave all construction access roads at least 100 feet on to the site
from the main road.
• Pave construction roads that have a daily traffic volume of less than
50 vehicle trips.
• MM 3-2 The following measures from the District's Rule 403, Table 1, Best
Available control Measures (Applicable to All construction Activity) shall
also be implemented: (Air Quality)
a. Stabilize backfill material during handling and at completion of
activity.
b. Pre-water soils prior to cut and fill activities.
C. Stabilize wind erodible surfaces to reduce dust.
d. Stabilize surface soils where support equipment and vehicles will
operate.
e. Stabilize disturbed soils throughout the construction site.
f. Pre-apply water and re=apply water as necessary to maintain soils
during earth=moving activities. Visible emissions shall not exceed
100 feet in any direction.
g. Maintain at least six feet of freeboard on haul vehicles.
h. Stabilize stockpiled soils.
i. Limit vehicular travel to established unpaved roads (haul routes)
and unpaved parking lots.
• MM 4-1 All construction vehicles or equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within
1,000 feet of a dwelling shall be equipped with property operating and
maintained mufflers. This requirement shall be included on the contractor
specifications and shall be verified by the Planning Director. (Noise)
• MM 4-2 Stockpiling and/or vehicle staging areas shall be located on-site and as far
as practical from sensitive noise receptors (i.e., residential homes located
south and east of the project). This requirement shall be included in the
contractor specifications and shall be verified by the Planning Director.
(Noise)
p J IP�5(
Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006
TTM 30350
Page 7
• MM 11-1 In conjunction with Tentative Tract Maps 33443 and 33623, pay the $800
per acre mitigation fee to the Tribe for 36 acres of habitat that will be
impacted by the three-subdivision project that may be occupied by the
federally endangered fringe-toed lizard and other species of concern
including: the flat-tailed horned lizard, Palm Springs ground squirrel, Palm
Springs pocket mouse; species of concern that have a lower likelihood of
onsite occurrence, including burrowing owl and black tailed gnatcatcher
and SNPS-sensitive chaparral sand verbena that does occur on the site
and slender wooly heads, if it occurs there now or may in the future.
(Biological Resources)
• MM 11-2 Conduct pre-construction surveys for burrowing owls within 48 hours of
construction and have a qualified biologist remove them, if found, and
collapse burrows to prevent re-occupation. (Biological Resources)
• MM 11-3 Conduct pre-construction live trapping for burrowing mammals 48 hours in
advance of grading to remove burrowing animals that may otherwise be
entombed and to obtain better data on potentially occurring species.
(Biological Resources)
• MM 11-4 Refrain from storing soils or building materials on-site in an unconfined
manner that would attract burrowing species. Stored soil shall be covered
and weighted to prevent wildlife intrusion. spoils from development shall
be removed to prevent potential attraction of sensitive species. (Biological
Resources)
• MM 12-1 Archaeological monitoring of earth-disturbing activities shall be done by a
qualified archaeologist and tribal appointed monitor in compliance with the
tribal Historic Preservation Office. (Cultural and Historic Resources)
• MM 12-2 In the event that cultural resources are located during grading activities on
the 23 acres of tribal land related to this project, construction must be
halted in the vicinity of the find and the BIA Regional Archaeologist and
project archaeologist shall be notified. If cultural resources are located
during grading activities on the eleven acres of non-reservation (fee land),
construction activities must be halted in the vicinity of the find and the
project archaeologist shall be notified. Work should not proceed in the
area of the find, but rather be redirected, if possible, until a qualified
archaeologist has been consulted to determine the significance of the find.
The City of Palm Springs General Plan Historic element policy 5b/16
includes the requirement "...if archaeological resources are uncovered
during grading for any project within the planning area, the building
contractor shall stop grading immediately. The contractor shall notify the
City and shall summon a qualified archaeologist to determine the
significance of uncovered resources and specify appropriate mitigation."
(Cultural and Historic Resources)
I OF,)
Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006
'RM 30350
Page 8
NOTIFICATION
A public hearing notice was advertised and was mailed to all property owners within 400
feet of the subject property owners. As of the writing of this report, staff has not received
any public comments regarding this project.
i nd O. ISerson Ca . ng, AICP
of Pripal Planner Dire „ Services
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Reduced copy of TTM 30350
3. Draft Resolution / Conditions of Approval
4. Mitigated Negative Declaration
H:WSERS\PLAN\TTM 30350 Contempo HomesTC Staff Report 03-22-06 TTM 30350[2006-03161.doc
L?'ir
PROOF OF PUBLICATION r -u,i$ +space for County Clerk's Filing Slump
(2015.5.C.C.P) 2duo11;''.1; u
NOTICE OF P1,atJO HEARING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CITY CITY
PALM SP LIN RINGS
County of Riverside TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30350
SOUTH OF ERONA ROAD a
WC'ST OF GENE AUTRY TRAIL
a QTheCC,ty of PdI,Sprl gENG�I'hat'he iaCity CounciPubl� l
City Council 9neetin meeting of April 5,2006.Tne
Caravan Way belrnt6C.pbrt�gell,IT
2G00 Fa k TahgU he
G
I am a citizen Of the United States and a resident of The purpose of this heprin p
the County aforesaid,I am over the Age of eighteen IIca lon by Conmmpo Hp Ws to consider an ac=
years,and not a party to or interested in the scri, 3035
a cell into 3q Ild/e1,ei" sf `IP�'rpTjdrrltste 17ra2_
shove-entitled matter.I am the principal cleric of a ranging ulecm I6e761 to 12 973 ggUam feet tin lsrzp.
printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING and v+ust of Gene f 0 T south of feet 1 gp,la
COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, ripn s Autry rail,Zoned Ry_U, Scc-
printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, ---o--
County of Riverside.and which newspaper has been ��-� " "' •+•
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the .
Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of
California under the date of March 24, 1988.Case
Number 191236;that the notice,of which the
annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller
than non pariel,has been published in each regular
and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the fallowing dates,to Wit: i „;p :I_.I i i ._i i�•:{'i ri -
March 25"',2006I-'- `" -
_"—__'__`�'__--'__"—,_____.—"_` ENYIRONM�Ww�n'�'-.
ENTAL DETERMINATION;
Negague OaclBratlpn war; •h Or;1ft
All in the year 2006 � untler toe nuldelinns at thn Ceilfomirn�nvllro^njen�
City Cvunc ut(heOheannd wlu be rvvlpwnd by cue
vlcee ry vlaw this document at rthagrs pup-
I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the of the Can oneyWppYartment, Ciry F(alh 8200 E1 n I�pyva4
foregoing is true and correct. comments.a[; o�Iml sea snpm't writ{en
in p Ur to, the Cdy Council hear.
Dated at Palm Springs,California this--27u1,--day gEvfEw OF PROJEppCT INWRMATIDN:The staff
tlnponro ect OireeWap,,Po for dpcumanls regardincd.
� Nall 6eiwevn the hour,;
OF- M.rr Il'=---`-------`—,2006 Mandan lhrou h Fvda Public nnlcw at Ci(y
-- 7 g Ofyy1].Oe 3.m and 5.06
/ we of the Ciry Clark fills )3 3 820iaoc yytohv
would like f0 vcheduiu an aPpoingnenr tp rit
y f these documl nts.
COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION;
1 C Signature Hevin is nand/arnnyv/rR1n ana verbally at iRha5 u61in
ter, comfords may r dery the headsg oWm.
by ivnur(for marl or be n, del 1, th,cCity Council
3200 E,Thompson,4 -Ingyn Way
Pa6>,Springs, CA 92a,G2
man bC limlte4 o ry�iryne oposudat
yy profucl In court
ten
5t lhr, Public ht arin y he Issue„siren
® m written cOrrespontlonce tlpwerea to Ithe CIpr
Clerk co or over to the. ublic hl.ahng, (Govern
ment Cpda Secpon 65009[b][2j).
An rE-I'd pees well he glued 9t;aid nearing for all
4 In ihisedi20 ybe herd questions rapartl-
Y ert�an, Plannlr tlilvclad to Edward O. Rop-
]60-323.6245, g Service:- DeP;lrtmen(, al
a nscesits ayutl l con e,st I calla,porfavor Ilame q
la Ciudad do Palm Gprinq, puede habiar con
IVaalne I-i"ge1 telefoncl (766) �Aue e
Pubiisheq;3/2y/2006ames Thompson, qry Clerl:
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30350
CONTEMPO HOMES
SOUTH OF VERONA ROAD & WEST OF GENE AUTRY TRAIL
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California,
will hold a public hearing at its meeting of April 5, 2006, The City Council meeting begins at
6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm
Springs.
The purpose of this hearing is to consider an application by Contempo Homes for Tentative
Tract Map 30350 to subdivide an approximate 11.42-acre parcel into 39 single-family
residential lots ranging from 6,761 to 12,973 square feet in size. The subject site is located
south of Verona Road and west of Gene Autry Trail, Zoned R-1-D, Section 6.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A Draft Negative Declaration was prepared for this
project under the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and will be
reviewed by the City Council at the hearing. Members of the public may view this document
at the Planning Services Department, City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm
Springs, and submit written comments at, or prior to, the City Council hearing.
REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION: The staff report and other supporting documents
regarding this project are available for public review at City Hall between the hours of 8:00
a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Please contact the Office of the City Clerk at
(760) 323-8204 if you would like to schedule an appointment to review these documents.
COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Response to this notice may be made verbally at the
Public Hearing and/or in writing before the hearing. Written comments may be made to the
City Council by letter (for mail or hand delivery) to:
James Thompson, City Clerk
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Any challenge of the proposed project in court may be limited to raising only those issues
raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered
to the City Clerk at, or prior, to the public hearing. (Government Code Section 65009[b][2]).
An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard.
Questions regarding this case may be directed to Edward O. Robertson, Planning Services
Department, at 760-323-8245.
Si necesita ayuda con esta carta, porfavor Ilame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede _
hablar con Nadine Fieger telefono (760) 323-8245.
�J' es Thompson, City Clerk
Department of Planning Services w N E
(2 Vicinity Map s
A
VIAESCU LA ¢ NORLGTI ST
w
z
� U W
7
Legend
M Site
C�500'Radius
VISTA CHINO
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO: Tentative Tract Map 30350 DESCRIPTION: Application by Contempo Homes to
subdivide an approximate 11.42 acre parcel into 39 single-
family residential lots ranging from 6,761 to 12,973 square
APPLICANT: Contempo Homes feet in size at the south of Verona Road and west of Gene
Autry Trail, Zone R-1-D, Section 6. APN: 677-030-001.
�PA�M.Sp
City ®f Palm Springs
V
Office of the City Cierk
* rycoT^ortnreo,^' * 3200 E.Tahquirz Canyon Way • Palm Springs, California 92262
O �P Tel: (760) 323-8204 ' Fax (760)322-8332 ' Web: www.ci.palm-springs.ca.us
AFFIDAVIT
OF
MAILING NOTICES
I, the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby
certify that a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing, to consider an application by
Contempo Homes for Tentative Tract Map 30350 to subdivide an approximate
11.42-acre parcel into 39 single-family residential lots ranging from 6,761 to
12,973 square feet in size, was mailed to each and every person set forth on the
attached list on the 23rd day of March, 2006, in a sealed envelope, with postage
prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California.
(287 notices mailed)
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 28th day of March, 2006.
e _
�fAMES THOMPSON
i
City Clerk
el,.
/kdh
HAUSERS%C-CLK\Hearing Notices\Affdavit-Contempo T-FM30350 040506.doe
Post Office Box 2743 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 d O(I 1113
NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION REPS MS APRIL HILDNER
Public Hearing Notice (TAHQUITZ RIVERS ESTATES) MR TIM HOHMEIER
Case T'rM 33623/TTM 30350 241 EAST MESQUITE AVENUE (DEEPWELL ESTATES)
CONTEMPO HOMES PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 1387 CALLE DE MARIA
CC Meeting-04.05.06 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264
MS SHERYL HAMLIN MR JOHN HANSEN
MS ROXANN PLOSS (HISTORIC TENNIS CLUB AREA) (WARM SANDS NEIGHBORHOOD)
(BEL DESIERTO NEIGHBORHOOD ) 565 WEST SANTA ROSA DRIVE PO BOX 252
930 CHIA ROAD PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
MS MALLIKA ALBERT MS DIANE AHLSTROM MR KENT CHAMBERLIN
(CHINO CANYON ORGANIZATION) (MOVIE COLONY NEIGHBORHOOD) (TENNIS CLUB AREA)
2241 NORTH I_EONARD ROAD 475 VALMONTE SUR 373 MONTE VISTA
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
MR BOB MAHLOWITZ
(SUNMOR NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP) MS PAULA AUBURN MR BOB DICKINSON
246 NORTH SYBIL ROAD (SUNRISE/VISTA CHINO AREA) VISTA LAS PALMAS HOMEOWNERS
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 1369 CAMPEON CIRCLE 755 WEST CRESCENT DRIVE
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
MR BILL SCOTT
(OLD LAS PALMAS NEGIBORHOOD) MR. SEIMA MOLOI
540 VIA LOLA (DESERT HIGHLAND GATEWAY)
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 359 W. SUNVIEW AVENUE
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-1459
MR PETE MORUZZI
dA ii-3�'C'IU"d l.hll;r PALM SPRINGS MODERN COMMITTEE
`.�'c•i L';Yi'9+.:.; ;34'7u_ E" :=ice PO BOX 4738
PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-4738
CASE NO TTM 30350
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS MRS JOANNE BRUGGEMANS
PLANNING &ZONING DEPT 506 W SANTA CATALINA ROAD
VERIFICATION NOTICE I 1 1 ATTN SECRETARY PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
PO BOX 2743
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-2743
MS MARGARET PARK
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA
INDIANS 1, 1 1 I 1 1 INDIANS
650 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
MR EDWARD TORRES THE KEITH COMPANIES
-- - - - CONTEMPO HOMES, INC. 73-733 FRED WARING DR,#100
SPONSORS I 1 I 1701 N. PALM CANYON DR.,#1 PALM DESERT, CA 92260
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262
q
l 'f
v\�
�i � daro 33 �� 14, osO6
501-411-001 501-442-012 501-443-020 „, M
Walnut Estates Inc Harry & Regina Olton Veronic oyse JZ�I I
110 W Broad St PO Box 2 36 6Th St 11F
Bergenfield, NJ 07621 Apo, AE 09710 York, NY 10016
501-424-010 677-020-026 677-020-027
Benjamin & Ellen Hinchman Usa 677 Usa 677
730 Napoleon St Us Dept Odf Interior Us Dept Of Interior
Johnstown, PA 15901 Washington, DC 21401 Washington, DC 21401
677-020-028 501-425-008 677-040-018
Usa 677 Richard T & Judy Starnes Spectrasite Communications I1
Us Dept Of Interior 32 Stone Pillar Ln PO Box 723427
Washington, DC 21401 Fort Valley, VA 22652 Atlanta, GA 31139
501-411-00V 501-422-015 677-471-041
Federi A De Toledo �M Taniel & Makroohi Nishanian George P & Lynn Rice
286 Alisop P1 5640 Springbrook Dr 3011 Pine Valley Rd
oy, MI 48084 Troy, MI 48098 Gardnerville, NV 89410
501-423-007 501-423-011 501-423-012
Suzanne L Seplow Marsha Teasley Susan B Jacoby
PO Box 1061 1718 Holly-Vista Ave 164 S Hayworth 108
Los Angeles, CA 90024 Los Angeles, CA 90027 Los Angeles, CA 90048
li
677-040-015 677-470-018 501-402-004
Palm Springs Storage Partner: Deepika R Wickremesinghe Nicolas M Kublicki *M*
11560 Tennessee Ave 2792 Fyler P1 2428 Bowmont Or
Los Angeles, CA 90064 Los Angeles, CA 90065 Beverly Hills, CA 90210
501-422-004 677-030-001 501-424-014
Natalie M Woods Carlos A Vigon Ruth Pacillas
1483 W 183Rd St 103 Strand St B 317 S Maple Ave
Gardena, CA 90248 Santa Monica, CA 90405 Montebello, CA 90640
501-413-009 677-471- y� �] 501-422-008
N Cryder Ge or SueI /t'� / Alan L Walter
555 E Ocean Blvd 810 15 2 Resehaven Ln 4164 Ventura Canyon Ave
Long Beach, CA 90802 any" Country, CA 91387 Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
501-413-002 501-443-018 501-442-003
Malvina D volynskaya I Joseph J & Jeremy Ruiz Christopher W & Anne Neal
4221 Colfax; Ave F 5591 Newbriar Way 2796 Via Sinaloa
Studio City, CA 91604 Chino Hills, CA 91709 Claremont, CA 91711
677-471-004 677-471-019 677-040-023
Carol A Brown Fernando Kelley Southern California Edison C<
1546 Verde Vista Dr 507 Florence Ave PO Box 800
Monterey Park, CA 91754 Monterey Park, CA 91755 Rosemead, CA 91770
501-421-007 501-402-011 501-442-006
Tr Malikyar Donna G Myers Terry & Billie Robinson
1233 Pillsbury Ln 1819 Warnock Or 227 Jeannie Way
El Cajon, CA 92020 Ramona, CA 92065 Vista, CA 92083
501-442-015 501-423-015 501-444-013
Isabel Alvarez Gerrit & Ola Steenhagen ' Leticia Salazar
6470 Chandler Dr 11304 Red Cedar Dr 1533 W Hays St
San Diego, CA 92117 San Diego, CA 92131 Banning, CA 92220
677-00 �4 M 677-030-022 677-030-024
David Celine Kaiser Cvcwd Cvcwd
302 Avenida Ximino PO Box 1058 PO Box 1058
thedral City, CA 92234 Coachella, CA 92236 Coachella, CA 922,36
677-040-026 501-441-001 501-442-020
Cvcwd Andy & Dora Lavariega Andy C & Dora Lavariega
PO Box 1058 PO Box 10520 PO Box 10520
Coachella, CA 92236 Palm Desert, CA 92255 Palm Desert, CA 92255
501-424-006 677-470-008 677-470-015 M
Barbara Soldano *B* Phillip J Catalli Ruth L cillas
74366 Parosella St 44421 Town Center Way C 3393 rnico St
Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 m Springs, CA 92262
501-425-010 501-441-004 501-402-0
Larry D Gable Julianne K Parks Brian Sean
3150 E Via Escuela 2030 N Whitewater Club Dr 27 E Verona Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 alm Springs, CA 92262
501-424-012 501-441-014 501-422-017
Kevin W Kailey James & Nancy Stuart Carl R Dick
230 N Via Las Palmas 1037 Tamarisk Rd 180 W Oasis Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-443-019 677-471-002 501-401-0 w N1
John C Phelan Yolanda Espinoza Steve rtinez
2081 N Los Alamos Rd 2288 E Amado Rd 315 E Verona Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 lm Springs, CA 92262
501-401-005 501-401-006 501-401-013
Willie M & Laurie Moxley Tanyo & Martina Ravicz Francesca Maxwell
3088 E Verona Rd 3060 E Verona Rd 3044 E Verona Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-402-005 501-402-006 501-402-007
Donald G Broadhurst Tr Pierce Lisa Unruh
3045 E Verona Rd 3065 E Verona Rd 3077 E Verona Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
77-/7' d- 77il
501-402-Ov� p 501-402-009 501-402-010
Peter dEXSon James M & Denise Francois Paul G & Kathrine Barton *M*
31 E Verona Rd 3121 E Verona Rd 3141 Verona Rd
alm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-413-010 501-413-011 501-413-012
Wendon & Judi Wilcox Tr Stangl Jan Burlison
3066 E Via Escuela 3080 E Via Escuela 3084 E Via Escuela
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-421-002 501-421-004 501-421-012
Christine L Farley Henry C & Linda Herbst *M* Gary A & Laura Boyse
2406 N Whitewater Club Dr 2372 N Whitewater Club Dr 2150 N Whitewater Club Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-421-013 501-421-014 501-421-015
Harvey Evans David & Patricia Morales Mark J & Elizabeth Lanca
2300 N Whitewater Club Dr 2230 N Whitewater Club Dr 2210 N Whitewater Club Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-421-016 501-422-011 501-422-016
David & Catherine Hobbs Danielle Howard Loretta J Young
2190 N Whitewater Club Dr 2297 N Whitewater Club Dr 2311 N Whitewater Club Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-422-018 501-423-003 501-424-005
Donald & Patrice Mangione Faustino & Barbara Gallegos Charles H Yoshioka
2265 N Whitewater Club Dr 2332 N San Clemente Rd 2258 N San Antonio Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-425-007 501-425-009 501-425-012
Herbert S & Candy Weinper Deana Hutchens J Ferdinand
3108 E Via Escuela 3122 E Via Escuela 3190 E Via Escuela
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-431-001 501-441-002 501-441-003
Daidys E Kamoei William E Eaddy , Raul H & Esperanza Vega
3045 E Via Escuela 2070 N Whitewater Club Dr 2050 N Whitewater Club Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-441-009 501-441-010 501-441-011
Jesus R & Laura Rodriguez Ricardo B & Eva Ruiz Gerald Fitzsimmons
1850 N Whitewater Club Dr 1 1800 N Whitewater Club Dr 1 1780 N Whitewater Club Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-441-015 501-441-016 501-442-010
Daniel L & Dolores Mccall Roxie E Petee Anthony F & Donna Quarto
2870 E Verona Rd 1880 N Whitewater Club Dr 1807 Whitewater Club Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
. T/ %y .3a�So � 7✓y 336�3 CJ
501-442-011 501-442-014 lr �1 501-442-016
Tr Quarto George randsen !"" Daniel H & Patricia Carroll
1807 N Whitewater Club Dr 189 itewater Club Dr 2005 N Whitewater Club Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92262 m Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-442-021 501-442-022 501-444-003
Joe & Tammi Ianni Lorraine Schulman Southwestern Ent
2011 N Whitewater Club Dr 2071 N Whitewater Club Dr 2050 N San Antonio Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-444-004 501-444-007 501-444-014
Jess L Miller Francisco Piza Jackie L Trager
2030 N San Antonio Rd 1900 N San Antonio Rd 1955 N San Clemente Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-470-001 677-470-002 677-470-003
Federico Lamberte Margie Kirkwood Gerardo & Armida Delgado
2071 Arnica St 2061 Arnica St 2051 Arnica St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-470-004 677-470-005 677-470-006
Cynthia M Muller John F & Rizalina Jones Jessica & Javier Zarate
2041 Arnica St 2031 Arnica St 2021 Arnica St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-470-007 677-470-009 677-470-010
Francisco Pereira Wilhelm & Rogelia Schneider Martin P Nolasco
2011 Arnica St 3251 Arnica St 3273 Arnica St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-470-012 677-470-013 677-470-017
Jose H & Carmen Tapia Etelberto Sandoval Liliana Raygada
3327 Arnica St 3349 Arnica St 3437 Arnica St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-470-019 677-470-020 677-470-021
Ahmed Mandour Solomon E Hutchings *B* Sheila Ault
3481 Arnico St 3503 Arnica St ! 3525 Arnica St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-470-022 677-470-023 677-470-024
Oscar A & .Maria Joys Salvador & Benita Alvarez Zacharias Comparan
3547 Arnico St 3569 Arnico St 3591 Arnico St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-470-025 !'! 677-470-026 677-470-027
Sergio A Cuevas David Gietter William E Pellum
3613 Arnico St 3635 Arnico St 3657 Arnico St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
// /7 3O3 �Su .ly/,1 33 (of3 ��
677-470-028 677-470-029 677-470-030
Ralph Walton James B & James Abernathy Leonard Tugman
3679 Arnico St 2008 Norloti St 2018 Norloti St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-470-031 677-470-032 677-470-033
Gildardo R & Elvis Ruiz Gilberto & Rosa Romero Mario & Maria Villareal
2028 Norloti St 2038 Norloti St 2048 Norloti St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-470-034 677-470-035 677-471-001
Patricia & Darlene Dedmon Orville L & Lisa Brown James D Shannon
2058 Norloti St 2068 Norloti St 2079 Norloti St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-471-006 677-471-007 677-471-009
Joan L Walker Gene L & Christine Marietta Carole A Stokes
2029 Norloti St 2019 Norloti St 2046 Zachary Ct
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-471-010 677-471-011 677-471-012
Ernest R & Kathryn Smith Sebastian & Maria Orozco Cordelia A Escobar
2056 Zachary Ct 2066 Zachary Ct 2076 Zachary Ct
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-471-013 677-471-014 677-471-015
Joan M Selby Adan Dolores Wyrick P & Carole Anderson
2067 Zachary Ct 2057 Zachary Ct 2046 Zachary Ct
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-471-016 677-471-017 677-471-020
Curt Riggs Martha J Davis Marguerite A Barbour
2037 Zachary Ct 2034 Marni Ct 2064 Marni Ct
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-471-021 677-471-022 677-471-023
Adams Z Bock Violetta Clavere Richard & Shirley Smith
2074 Marni Ct 2065 Marni Ct 2055 Marni Ct
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-471-025 677-471-026 v N1 677-471-027
Jean M Wyman Sandra havarria N" SalvaVason
& Rosa Urrutia
2035 Marni Ct 2030 ason Ct 2040 Ct
Palm Springs, CA 92262 P m Springs, CA 92262 m gs, CA 92262
677-471-030 677-471-031 677-471-032
Kevin J Dodd Andrew P & Tina Gainey Alfonso & Dolores Guerrero
2070 Jason Ct 2063 Jason Ct 2053 Jason Ct
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
71 3 42'
677-471-033 677-471-034 677-471-035
Adrian Quiroz Tr Piiter Eugenio & Luz Coorio
2043 Jason Ct 2033 Jason Ct 2012 Arnico St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-471-036 677-471-037 677-471-038
Maria A & Hector Guerrero Jonathan E & Ludevina Jones Steve H & Socorro Wright
2022 Arnico St 2032 Arnico St 2042 Arnico St
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-471-039 677-471-040 677-471-042
Julio C & Juana Maravilla Alfonso Tapia Donna J & Ronald Steinbrueckc
2052 Arnico St 2062 Arnico St 3351 E Via Escuela
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-471-043 677-471-045 677-471-046
Philip & Candy Palacios Gilberto Perez Debbie Peraza
3387 E Via Escuela 3457 E Via Escuela 3495 E Via Escuela
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-471-047 677-471-048 677-471-049
William P Thompson James T Lucien Robert Kish
3531 E Via Escuela 3567 E Via Escuela 3603 E Via Escuela
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
677-471-050 677-471-051 501-442-018
Arturo & Rosalba Ramirez William H Cummins Irene A Fellman
3639 E Via Escuela 3675 E Via Escuela 1360 E Del Mar Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-421-00�✓ �..M 501-421-008 501-444-018
Dennis Cramer John B Negri Carolyn V Groves
171 Vista Chino 7 255 N E1 Cielo Rd 190 255 N El Cielo Rd 358
m Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-442-004 501-402-013 501-402-014
Candidos & Dolores Sandoval Lisa Finck George H Harmon
1500 E San Rafael Dr 133 3190 E Vincentia Rd 3160 E Vincentia Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-402-015 501-402-016 501-402-018
Michelle Barnett Robert C & Sondra Bock Anthony A & Lavonne Barton
3140 E Vincentia Rd 3120 E Vincentia Rd 3090 E Vincentia Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-402-019 501-402-020 501-402-021
Stacy A Crary Cyril A & Martha Ryan Joseph W & Marjorie Dyson
3060 E Vincentia Rd 3050 E Vincentia Rd 3030 E Vincentia Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-411-004 501-411-005 501-411-007
David P & Elsa Castillo Jonathan D Molina Israel G & Maria Ibarra
2300 N San Gorgonio Rd 2270 N San Gorgonio Rd 2210 N San Gorgonio Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-411-010 501-411-011 501-411-012
Margaret R Wood Robert W & Steven Pitera Lester J & Donna Cawley
2267 N San Antonio Rd 2295 N San Antonio Rd 2335 N San Antonio Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-411-013 501-411-014 501-411-015
Melinda Molnar Peter Penta Allan & Shannon Bowlin
2375 N San Antonio Rd 2391 N San Antonio Rd 2233 N San Antonio Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-413-001 501-413-004 501-422-001
Bob & Brad Zukovic *M* Shawn & Sandra Kaohn Maureen P Brogan
3111 E Ventura Rd 3003 E Ventura Rd 2390 N Los Alamos Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-422-002 501-422-003 501-422-005
Jessica M Caldera Thomas A Mason Rita Melton
2350 N Los Alamos Rd 2340 N Los Alamos Rd 2266 N Los Alamos Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-422-006 501-422-007 501-422-014
Kern Tatum Kevin L Hewitt Darlene D Goins
2252 N Los Alamos Rd 2230 N Los Alamos Rd 3195 E Vincentia Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-423-004 501-423-008 501-423-009
Stephen F & Milinda Lowe Patrick J Canonge Lynne Glickauf *B*
2298 San Clemente Rd 2231 N Los Alamos Rd 2235 N Los Alamos Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-423-010 501-423-014 501-423-016
Mark L Toellner Stephen A Rider Tobia & Darcy Colantuono
2265 N Los Alamos Rd 2385 N Los Alamos Rd 2378 N San Clemente Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-424-001 501-424-002 501-424-003
Richard & Linda Weber Heath C Millett Carl V & Patricia Modugno
2380 N San Antonio Rd 2352 N San Antonio Rd 2330 N San Antonio Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-424-004 501-424-007 501-424-008
Walter H & Margaret Brandes Anne M Ryan Jennifer L Hummel
2300 N San Antonio Rd 2218 N San Antonio Rd 2211 N San Clemente Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
334C-?3 �01
501-424-009 501-424-011 501-424-013
Dominga Donis Robert D & Margaret Klinge David A & Emma Felker
2233 N San Clemente Rd 2295 N San Clemente Rd 2377 N San Clemente Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-425-002 501-425-003 501-425-004
Michelle Everett Mark & Elizabeth Avner Tr Kramer
3187 E Ventura Rd 3169 E Ventura Rd 3149 E Ventura Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-425-005 501-425-006 501-425-013
Christopher Corr Gary R Daniels Steven W Foresman
3133 E Ventura Rd 3121 E Ventura Rd 3197 E Ventura Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-431-002 501-431-003 501-431-004
Delia R Preston Osmar Rodriguez Roy J & Esperanza Verstraete
2080 N San Gorgonio Rd 2060 N San Gorgonio Rd 2050 N San Gorgonio Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-431-015 501-431-0 N� 501-431-017
Walter L Brown Cora L ico Michael & Jill Hayes
1981 San Antonio Rd 201 N San Antonio Rd 2033 N San Antonio Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 lm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-431-0173 501-431-019 501-442-001
Patrick B & Sandra Boylan Mohammad Babakan Dennis H & Candice Miles
2055 N San Antonio Rd 2089 N San Antonio Rd 2090 N Los Alamos Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-442-002 501-442-005 501-442-007
Katharine M Virgiel Anastacio I & Mirna Rosario Robin L Blalock
2068 N Los Alamos Rd 2002 N Los Alamos Rd 1910 N Los Alamos Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-442-009 501-443-001 501-443-003
Stephen M Bolerjack Libby Fiorda Tr Kirk
1820 N Los Alamos Rd 2098 N San Clemente Rd 2078 N San Clemente Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 ! Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-443-004 501-443-005 501-443-006
John J Matthews *B* Bong K Wijaya Lloyd & Lisa Nickerson
2050 N San Clemente Rd 1 !, 2010 N San Clemente Rd 1994 N San Clemente Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-443-007 501-443-008 501-443-009
Tr Valkis Mary D Payne Leroy G & Donna Jones
679 E Alexander Way 1880 N San Clemente Rd 1850 N San Clemente Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-443-012 501-443-013 501-443-014
Gustave Patzner Donald Davis Steven K & Cindy May
1855 N Los Alamos Rd 1889 N Los Alamos Rd 1907 N Los Alamos Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-443-016 501-444-001 501-444-005
Ruben F Rios Doreen Prudeaux Alejandro Robledo
2003 N Los Alamos Rd 2092 N San Antonio Rd 2004 N San Antonio Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-444-006 501-444-008 501-444-012
Denise L Coleman Tr Grozdich Arthur Frink *M*
1984 N San Antonio Rd 1882 N San Antonio Rd 1851 N San Clemente Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
501-444-016 501-444-017 501-444- X' ,
Ruth Laughrin Jose A Guiterrez WalterN & rSondra Debruyn
2009 N San Clemente Rd 2025 N San Clemente Rd 207 San Clemente Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 PZm Springs, CA 92262
501-444-020 501-413-0 X-PI 677-471-029
Tr Hyland E Stra s Armando Rodriguez
161 Civic Dr 8 PO x 498 PO Box 817
m
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Springs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92263
677-471-04L� 677-470-014 501-443-011
Curtis exander Francisco Hernandez Carlos M Camacho
PO x 810 PO Box 2532 PO Box 4923
lm Springs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92263
501-402-012 501-421-001 677-040-016
Robert V Samuelian Ofer Gabriel Gary W & Corrin Sanders
611 S Palm Canyon Dr 7-568 4751 E Palm Canyon Dr A 1935 S Birdie Way
Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264
501-423-005 677-040-019 501-442-008
Esther Mendoza Ralph B & Susan Coomber Thomas & Diane Ronda
1010 S Farrell Dr Hilton Head Dr 4 PO Box 1002
Palm Springs, CA 92264 Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 Rancho Mirage, CAN 92270
677-470-016 501-421-017 677-040- 'v
Christopher E & Nancy Whitne, Brisco Properties Inc Rbs E erprises Inc
3170 Del Rosa Ave 3333 Central Ave A 19 2 Stewart St
San Bernardino, CA 92404 Riverside, CA 92508 rvine, CA 92618
501-443-010 501-444-015 501-411-003
Dean M Smith Millie Fowlie Tr Ward
57 Bluecoat 1747 Irvine Ave 5341 Heil Ave
Irvine, CA 92620 Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Huntington Beach, CA 92649
T 3 a 3 Co of 1717,
501-411-002 501-190-011 677-471-024
Sheryl C Phelps Burnett Development Corp Ariady Kareotes
24901 Del Monte St 1300 Bristol St N 200 351 N Newport Blvd 558
Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92663
677-470-036 677-040-029 501-442-013
Howard & Nancy Rudoff Bill Y & Regina Kobayashi Jeff Howie
5222 Stratford Ave 10055 Stilbite Ave 1240 E Ontario Ave 102
Westminster, CA 92683 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Corona, CA 92881
501-431-020 677-471-008 677-471-02 p M
Richard A & Mary Conant Larry H Stinson Martin Colucci X-Al
PO Box 411 747 Natoma St 182 ipley St
Santa Paula, CA 93061 San Francisco, CA 94103 n Francisco, CA 94107
501-401-004 501-443-015 677-470-011
Mark E Nelson David Edmunds Dale L Hamilton
3924 19Th St 1599 Green St 301 44 Laidley st
San Francisco, CA 94114 San Francisco, CA 94123 San Francisco, CA 94131
501-443-002 677-471-003 501-401-003 /'ZM
George Duffy George Duffy Amaral ucking Inc
3527 Mt Diablo Blvd 297 3527 Mt Diablo Blvd 297 PO Bx 915
Lafayette, CA 94549 Lafayette, CA 94549 on City, CA 94587
501-411-006 677-471-01 M *** 287 Printed ***
Marsh K & Octavia Eckhardt She 1le Abbey / /
7015 Mesa Dr PO 1570
Aptos, CA 95003 rndale, WA 98248
*?ALMSA
City of Palm Springs
* Office of the City Cleric
ry s^
* CeRPORPTEO • ' 3200 E.Tahqui[z Canyon Way • Palm Springs,California 92262
C �P Tel: (760) 323-8204 • Pax: (760) 322-8332 • Web: wwwci.palm-springs.ca.us
q(IFOR�
March 24, 2006
Ms. Claudia Salgado
Bureau of Indian Affairs
P. O. Box 2245
Palm Springs, CA 92263
Dear Ms. Salgado:
RE:: City Council Meeting —April 5, 2006
1. Tentative Tract Map 33623, N of Via Escuela &W of Gene Autry
2. Tentative Tract Map 30350, S of Verona &W of Gene Autry
The City Council of the City of Palm Springs will be conducting public hearings relating to the
above referenced subjects on April 5, 2006. Attached are three copies of the public hearing
notices to be forwarded to the appropriate Indian landowner(s) within the 400 ft. radius of the
project location.
The parcels of Indian owned land within the 400 ft. radius of the project are listed below:
APN 677-020-028 APN 677-020-027
APN 677-020-026
Please feel free to contact me if there are any questions or concerns, 323-8206.
�Sincerely,
Kathie Hart, CMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
/kdh
HAUSEWC-CMHeanng NahceMPubllc Hearing Nollces to BIA-Conlempo Homes.doc
Attachment: Public Hearing Notice, TTM 33623 (3 copies)
Public Hearing Notice, TTM 30350 (3 copies)
Postage paid envelopes (3)
Post Office Box 2743 0 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 YQC�17
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT -*.- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ❖
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4.1 LAND USE
The information in this section was developed via a combination of field reconnaissance
by members of the consultant team and a review of the City of Palm Springs General
Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The sites of the proposed projects comprise 35.86 acres of land that is currently
unimproved, vacant desert. There is an existing equestrian easement and flood control
levy along the northernmost edge of the project boundary. Research undertaken as part
of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment indicates that there have been no past uses
of the property.
Existing land uses surrounding the project site are illustrated in previous Figure 4 (Plan
View Aerial of the Project Site). As shown, to the north, the project sites are bordered by
the White Water River Channel and an adjacent northerly parcel of allotted, not leased
property that is presently undergoing project proposal review by the City of Palm
Springs. Beyond the Whitewater River Channel is vacant unimproved land. South of
the site occurs a tract of single family homes, beyond which is Vista Chino Road. To the
east, the project site is bordered by White Water Club Drive. Single family residences
are located along the western boundary of White Water Club Drive which also serves as
a secondary access route for additional homes west of the project site and for the Palm
Springs Country Club. The project site is bounded on its eastern edge by Gene Autry
Trail and further east is more vacant unimproved land.
The Palm Springs General Plan Land Use Element indicates that the site of the proposed
projects have a General Plan land use designation of Residential L6, which allows
residential development at a density of up to 6 dwelling units per acre. The City of Palm
Springs Official Zoning Map indicates that the site of the proposed projects have a
zoning classification of R-1-1) (7,500sq.ft) which allows residential development with a
minimum lot size requirement of 7,500 square feet.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project may have a significant effect on Land Use and Planning if it will conflict with
adopted general plans, policies, goals and/or zoning ordinances, be incompatible with
surrounding land uses or physically divide or disrupt an existing community.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-1
! 1-�r" /�1-5
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project physically divide an established community?
Less Than Significant Impact: The two proposed residential projects represent
infill development that is: 1) consistent with the underlying General Plan land
use designation (Residential L6); 2) generally conformant with the provisions of
the underlying zoning classification (R-1-D17,500s.f.);and,3) reflective of the type
and density of adjacent residential development. The project also proposes an
improved active open space area within the retention basin to be located in the
southeast corner of Alexander Village and the dedication of an easement to
facilitate the construction of a jogging/equestrian trail on the north side of the
project area available for use by project and neighborhood residents alike.
Therefore it is concluded that the proposed project will more likely serve to unify
rather than divide the established community.
b) Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan policy or regulation of an
agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less Than Significant Impact:
The Palm Springs General Plan Land Use Element indicates that the sites of the
proposed projects have a General Plan land use designation of Residential L6,
which allows residential development at a density of up to 6 dwelling units per
acre. The City of Palm Springs Official Zoning Map indicates that the site of the
proposed projects have a zoning classification of R-1-D (7,500sq. ft.) which
allows residential development with a minimum lot size requirement of 7,500
square feet.
Both Alexander Vista Estates and Alexander Village are single-family residential
development projects which generally comply with the project site's Zoning
Classification and are consistent with the Palm Springs General Plan. It is noted,
however, that both projects contain lots that meet the minimum lot size
requirement of 7,500 square feet, but reflect lot depths which are less than the
property development standard of 100 feet for residential development in the R-
1-D zone. However, when viewed in the context of the entire development of
both projects, the substandard lots do not appear to significantly conflict with the
integrity of the overall community design concept reflected by the proposed
projects. As a consequence, the subject conflict with the aforementioned
property development standard is determined to be less than significant.
S
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-2
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT -*.- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
0 Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact: As indicated previously in this document, the
site of the proposed project is located on a part of the Agua Caliente Indian
Reservation. More specifically, the project site is located within Section 6,
Township 4 South, Range 5 East,San Bernardino Base and Meridian. This places
the site of the proposed project within the boundaries of the Final Draft Tribal
Habitat Conservation Plan for the Agua Caliente Indian Reservation, Palm Springs,
California (November 12, 2002). Essentially, this as yet unadopted HCP was
developed to afford protection to the ReservatioWs widely diverse and
numerous biological resources. In this regard,it is noted that the species covered
by the Tribal HCP constitute a subset of those addressed by the draft Coachella
Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and with regard to sensitive
and protected species and habitats, essentially characterizes the project site in a
manner similar to the findings of the Biological Assessment prepared for the
subject projects. (See Section 4.12, Biological Resources, for more information in
this regard). Given that development of the project sites as proposed is
consistent with the Palm Springs General Plan and generally conformant with
the underlying zoning classification and that biological impact mitigation fees
will be paid by the proposed projects as would any other new development
within the fee area for the Fringe Toed Lizard, the proposed projects are not
expected to conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
PD 1-1 The proposed projects include an improved active open space area within
the retention basin to be located in Tentative Tract Map. No. 33443 and the
dedication of an easement to facilitate the construction of a
jogging/equestrian trail on the north side of the project area available for use
by project and neighborhood residents alike.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
There are no Standard Conditions or Requirements related to land use issues.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Since no significant impacts on land use were identified, no mitigation measures are
required.
,Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,21005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-3
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4.
4.2 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
Information in this section was derived primarily from the following documents:
LOS Engineering, Inc. Draft Traffic Impact Analysis, Contempo Homes (Alexander Village &
Vista Estates)City of Palm Springs,January 27,2005.
LOS Engineering, Inc. 77M 30350, Alexander Vista Estates/Alexander Village Traffic Study
Comment Responses,April 28,2005.
The above documents are available for public inspection during normal business hours
at the following locations:
City of Palm Springs Department of Planning and Building, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon
Way, Palm Springs, California 92263.
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Tribal Planning, Building & Engineering
Department, 650 East Tahquitz Canyon Way,Palm Springs, California 92262.
Bureau of Indian Affairs Palm Springs Agency, 901 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite C-
}
101,Palm Springs, California 92263.
The above referenced Traffic Impact Analysis was completed pursuant to direction of
the City of Palm Springs Traffic Engineering Department. The parameters by which the
traffic study was prepared included the determination of what intersections were to be
analyzed,the traffic scenarios to be analyzed, and the methods required for analysis.
Traffic intersections analyzed for this study are identified below in Table 4-1 (Traffic
Impact Analysis Study Area Intersections) and are shown in Fi e 9(Traffic Impact Analysis
Study Area) which depicts the spatial relationships between study area intersections and
the site of the proposed projects.
Existing roadways are further described as follows:
Vista Chino Drive,between Farrell Drive and Gene Autry Trail, is described as a "Major
Thoroughfare" on the City of Palm Springs Circulation Plan. This section of Vista Chino
is currently built as a 4-lane un-divided roadway with a center two-way left turn lane
(two travel lanes in each direction). The posted speed limit is 50 MPH.
.n�
.Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-4
INITIAL STUDWENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT `:` ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
TABLE 4-1
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS
r • r
• , r • • DATA
PROPOSED
COLLECTION
VISTA CHINO AT:
• Gene Autry Trail Existing signalized 1/13/05
• Farrell Drive Existing signalized 1/13/05
• Whitewater Club Existing T-intersection stop 1/13/05
Drive sign
VIA ESCUELA AT:
Gene Autry Trail Existing T-intersection stop 1/13/05
sign
Whitewater Club Existing 4-way stop sign 1/5/05
Drive
• Amico Street Existing/with T-intersection stop 1/5/05
l Proposed Extension sign(proposed to
become a 4-way
stop sign)
Contempo Drive Proposed T-intersection stop N/A
sign
Source: LOS Engineering, Inc.Draft Traffic Impact Analysis, Contempo Homes (Alexander Village & Vista Estates)
City of Palm Springs,January 27,2005.
Gene Autry Trail, in the vicinity of the project, is described as a "Major Thoroughfare"
on the City of Palm Springs Circulation Plan. Gene Autry Trail is only one of two major
north-south arterial streets in addition to Highway 111 providing access to Interstate-10
from Palm Springs. North of Vista Chino Drive, Gene Autry Trail is currently built as a
two-lane undivided roadway (one travel lane in each direction). The posted speed limit
is 55 MPH.
Farrell Drive, west of the project, is described as a "Secondary Thoroughfare" on the
City of Palm Springs Circulation Plan. It is built as a 4-lane un-divided roadway with a
center two-way left turn lane (two travel lanes in each direction).
Whitewater Club Drive, between Via Escuela and Vista Chino Drive, is described as a
"Collector Street" on the City of Palm Springs Circulation Plan. This roadway is
currently built as a two-lane undivided roadway(one travel lane in each direction.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July„2005 . n
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-5 �1_),
INITIAL STUDWENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS B•
Via Escuela Street. between Whitewater Club Drive and Gene Autry Trail, is described
as a "Collector Street" on the City of Palm Springs Circulation Plan. This roadway is
currently built as a two-lane undivided roadway (one travel lane in each direction).
Existing average daily trips (ADT)were obtained for the following roadway segments:
1) Gene Autry Trail from I-10 to Via Escuela(2/23/2004 City of Palm Springs)
2) Gene Autry Trail from Via Escuela to Chino Vista (2/23/2004 City of Palm
Springs)
3) Vista Chino from Farrell Drive to Gene Autry Trail (2/23/2004 City of Palm
Springs)
4) Whitewater Club Drive from Vista Chino to Via Escuela (1/18/05 LOS
Engineering)
5) Via Escuela from Whitewater Club Drive to Gene Autry (1/18/05 LOS
Engineering)
Analysis of peak hour intersection Level of Service (LOS) is the primary indicator of
circulation system performance. The project traffic study used the 2000 Highway
Capacity Manual Operations methodology to conduct the LOS analysis. LOS is defined
in terms of signal delay and approaching vehicle delay, (the average amount of time
vehicles must wait at an intersection) measured in seconds. LOS for each of the
intersections, summarized in the following Table 4-2 (Existing Intersection Level Of
Service) was calculated using the Synchro 6.0 software program (Traffic Corporation,
2003) and measured in ranges A through F. LOS A represents the best operating
condition and LOS F denotes the worst operating conditions and further defined as
follows:
U LOS A- Optimal conditions, insignificant delays(<10 seconds)
• LOS B -Stable operation, minimal delays (10.1-20 seconds)
• LOS C-Stable operation, acceptable delays (20.1-35 seconds)
U LOS D - Approaching Unstable, tolerable delays (35.1-55 seconds)
• LOS E-Unstable operation, significant delays(55.1-80 seconds)
• LOS F-Forced Flow,excessive delays (>80 seconds)
9
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-6
i
Palm Springs H
Country Club
Verona Road
m
c
m
C7
Project
Site
Via Escuela
11111
5 y 6 7 4
� d 8
a
Vista Chino
1 3 2
STUDYAREA INTERSECTIONS
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDY AREA
J I NOT TO SCALE
Figure 9
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ':'
TABLE 4-2
EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE(LOS)
INTERSECTION • •
HOUR
1. Farrell Drive @ Vista Chino All Midday 25.4 C
All PM 27.5 C
2. Gene Autry @ Vista Chino All Midday 40.0 D
All PM 46.5 D
3 Whitewater Club Drive @ Vista SB LR Midday 32.7 D
Chino
SB LR PM 32.6 D
4. Gene Autry Trail @ Via Escuela EB LT Midday >50 F
WB LTR Midday 25.7 D
EB LT PM >50 F
WB LTR PM >50 F
5 Whitewater Club Drive@ Via All Midday 7.5 A
Escuela
All PM 7.9 A
6. Armco Street @ Via Escuela NB LTR Midday 9.1 A
SB LTR Midday DNE DNE
NB LTR PM 9.9 A
SB LTR PM DNE DNE
7. Project Driveway @ Via Escuela SB LR Midday DNE DNE
SB LR AM DNE DNE
Source:LOS Engineering,Inc.Draft Traffic Impact Analysis,Contempo Homes(Alexander Village&Vista Estates)City
of Palm Springs,January 27,2005.
Notes: 1 Movement:EB LTR=Eastbound combination left through nght turn lane
2 Peak Hour—highest volume from l l-1PM for Midday and from 4-6PM for PM
3 Delay=HCM delay measured in seconds
4 LOS--Level of Service
5 DNE=Does not exist
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-8 r ea67
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ':'
Linder existing conditions, all of the study are intersections were calculated to operate at
an acceptable Level of Service (LOS), with the exception on the un-signalized
intersection of Gene Autry Trail and Via Escuela, which were calculated to operate at
LOS F.
Project Traffic Generation
The project traffic generation was calculated using the 7th Edition of Institute of
Transportation Engineers (TTE) Trip Generation Manual, 2003. (More conservative rates
over the equation and the AM peak hour traffic generation were used for the midday
analysis, as ITE does not publish a midday rate.) The TTE trip generation calculations
are included in the aforementioned traffic study. The project is calculated to generate
1,211 average daily trips (ADT) with 92 Midday peak hour trips (23 inbound and 69
outbound) and 124 PM peak hour trips (78 inbound and 46 outbound) as summarized in
Table 4-3 (Project Traffic Generation)below.
TABLE 4-3
PROJECT TRAFFIC GENERATION
PROJECT LANEP 11, PM
� •
PL "-7
• OUT I
118 SF Detached Homes 1,211 23 69 78 46
Source:LOS Engineering,Inc.Draft Traffic Impact Analysis,Contempo Homes(Alexander Village£+Vista Estates)City
of Palm Springs,January 27,2005.
Three (3) points of access are proposed for the project. Two are new driveways on Via
Escuela and one is the existing terminus of Verona Street just east of Whitewater Club
Drive. On Via Escuela, one driveway (Alexander Palms Drive) would align with Arnico
Street and the other driveway (Contempo Lane) would be a T-intersection. Project trip
estimates were distributed to the adjacent roadway network based on the locations of
local and regional attractions as well as schools, shopping and employment centers, and
access to the I-10 Freeway.
Existing Conditions+Project Traffic Generation
This scenario accounts for the addition of project traffic onto the existing background
traffic for AM, PM and ADT conditions. The intersection LOS calculated with the
addition of project traffic is shown in Table 4-4 (Existing + Project Intersection Level of
Service). The roadway ADTs with the addition of project traffic are shown in Table 4-5
(Existing+Project Segment ADT Volumes),
I
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-9 3'
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT B' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ':'
1
TABLE 4-4
EXISTING+PROJECT INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
Movement Peak Existing Existing+Project
1)Farrel Drive All Midday 25.4 C 25.5 C 0.1 No
@ Vista Chino All PM 27.5 C 27.8 C 0.3 No
2)Gene Autry All Midday 40.0 D 40.7 D 0.7 No
@ Vista Chino All PM 46.5 D 46.9 D 0.4 No
3)Whitewater Club Dr. SB LR Midday 32.7 D 34.1 D 1.4 No
@ Vista Chino SB LR PM 32.6 D 32.9 D 0.3 No
4)Gene Autry Trail EB LT Midday >50 F >50 F >2.0 Yes
@ Via Escuela WB LTR Midday 25.7 D 25.9 D 0.2 No
EB LT PM >50 F >50 F >2.0 Yes
WB LTR PM >50 F >50 F >2.0 Yes
With mitigation of All Midday 9.8 A 9.8 A 0.0 No
installing a traffic signal All PM 19.0 B 19.1 B 0.1 No
5)Whitewater ClubDr. All Midday 7.5 A 7.6 A 0.1 No
@ Via Escuela All PM 7.9 A 8.0 A 0.1 No
6)Arnico Street NB LTR Midday 9.1 A 9.3 A 0.2 No
@Via Escuela SB LR Midday DNE DNE 9.6 A NA No
NB LTR PM 9.9 A 10.7 B 0.8 No
SB LR PM DNE DNE 10.1 A NA No
7)Project Driveway SB LR Midday DNE DNE 9.2 A NA No
@ Via Escuela SB LR AM DNE DNE 10.6 B NA No
Source:LOS Engineering Inc.Draft Traffic Impact Analysis,Coutempo Homes(Alexander Village£+Vista Estates)City
of Palm Springs,January 27,2005.
Notes: 1 Delay is measured in seconds
2 LOS=Level of Service
3 Delta=The increase in delay from the project
4 Impact resulting from the project?(yes or no)
5 Movement:EB LTR=Eastbound combination left through right turn lane
6 DNE=Does not exist
7 Peak Hour-The highest traffic volume from Il-1PM for Midday and from 4-6PM for PM
t
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-10, erg
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •:' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ❖
TABLE 4-5
EXISTING+PROJECT SEGMENT ADT VOLUMES
CHINOVISTA WHITEWATER VIA
CLUB ESCUELA
• I-10 Via Escuela Farrell Vista Chino whitewaterClub
Via Escuela Vista Chino Gene Autry Via Escuela Gene Autry
Trail Trail
Major Major Major
Collector Collector
Thoroughfare Thoroughfare —Thoroughfare
2 2 4+TWLTL 2 2
,• 20,353 18,606 35,143 954 4,295
2/23/04 2/23/04 1/29/04 1/18/05 1/18/05
• 242 242 606 606 545
20,595 18,848 35,749 1,560 4,840
Source:LOS Engineering,Inc.Draft Traffic Impact Analysis,Contempo Homes(Alexander Village&Vista Estates)City
of Palm Springs,January 27,2005.
i I
Notes:T WLTL=Two-way left turn lane
Under existing plus project conditions, the study area intersections were calculated to
operate at acceptable LOS with the exception of the Gene Autry Trail/Via Escuela
intersection, which is calculated to continue to operate at LOS F (AM and PM). The
project is calculated to add more than 2.0 seconds of delay creating a direct project traffic
impact.
Cumulative Projects'Traffic Generation
Three (3) cumulative projects in the immediate vicinity of the project were identified by
the City of Palm Springs for cumulative analysis. The cumulative projects include:
1) Palm Springs Classic Planned Development District 231, is described as a mixed
use project on approximately 450 acres south of Vista Chino, west of Palm
Springs City Limit, and east of Gene Autry Trail. Traffic generation for this
cumulative project is estimated to be 16,500 ADT with 1,399 Midday peak hour
trips (485 inbound and 914 outbound) and 1,530 PM peak hour trips (947
inbound and 583 outbound).
f �l
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page'4 41,, N �-
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS•:'
2) Tract 32675 is a residential project of 25 homes at the northern terminus of North
Whitewater Club Drive. The traffic generation for this cumulative project is 290
ADT with 27 Midday peak hour trips (7 inbound and 20 outbound) and 30 PM
peak hour trips (19 inbound and 11 outbound).
3) Gene Autry Trail Widening Project is a City of Palm Springs project proposed to
widen Gene Autry Trail to 3 lanes in each direction from Vista Chino to Via
Escuela and to 2 lanes in each direction from Via Escuela to just before the south
approach to the Union Pacific railroad bridge. This project will not generate
traffic (except for temporary construction traffic), but rather would reduce traffic
congestion on Gene Autry Trail.
Existing+Project+ Cumulative Project Traffic Conditions
This scenario analyzes the addition of cumulative traffic onto the existing plus project
traffic for AM, PM and ADT conditions. The intersection LOS calculated with the
addition of cumulative traffic onto existing plus project conditions is shown in Table 4-6
(Existing+Project+Cumulative Intersection Level Of Service). The roadway ADTs with the
addition of cumulative traffic are shown in Table 4-7 (Existing + Project + Cumulative
Segment ADT Volumes).
i Under existing+project+cumulative conditions, the study intersections were calculated
to operate at acceptable LOS with the exception of.
1) Gene Autry Trail at Vista Chino, which is calculated to operate at LOS E (PM) due
to the addition of cumulative project traffic,
2) Whitewater Club at Vista Chino, which is calculated to operate at LOS F (AM and
PM) due to the addition of cumulative project traffic, and
3) Gene Autry Trail at Via Escuela, which is calculated to continue to operate at LOS
F (AM and PM) due to the addition of cumulative project traffic.
The project would add traffic cumulatively to these intersections.
i
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC40778.05 Page4-12 � �
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ':' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':'
TABLE 4-6
EXISTING+PROJECT+CUMULATIVE INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
ProjectMovement Peak Existing+Intersection 3 Hour4 Cumulative
• -lay' LOS2 • • •
1)Farrel Drive All Midday 25.5 C 26.1 C
@ Vista Chino All PM 27.8 C 27.9 C
2)Gene Autry All Midday 40.7 D 50.5 D
@ Vista Chino All PM 46.9 D 56.3 E
With Mitigation identified in the 39.4 D
Palm Springs Classics Traffic Study 38.5 D
3)Whitewater Club Dr. SB LR Midday 34.1 D 53.3 F
@ Vista Chino SB LR PM 32.9 D 101.7 F
With Mitigation of installing 5.4 A
a Traffic Signal 5.5 A
4)Gene Autry Trail. EB LT Midday >50 F >50 F
@ Via Escuela WB LTR Midday 25.9 D >50 F
EB LT PM >50 F >50 F
WB LTR PM >50 F >50 F
t� With Mitigation identified in the 13.0 B
Palm Springs Classics Traffic Study 33.3 C
5)Whitewater Club Dr. All Midday 7.6 A 7.7 A
@ Via Escuela All PM 8.0 A 8.1 A
6)Armco Street NB LTR Midday 9.3 A 9.4 A
@ Via Escuela SB LR Midday 9.6 A 9.6 A
NB LTR PM 10.7 B 10.8 B
SB LR PM 10.1 A 10.2 B
7)Project Driveway SB LR Midday 9.2 A 9.2 A
@ Via Escuela SB LR AM 10.6 B 10.7 B
Source:LOS Engineering,Inc.Draft Traffic Impact Analysis,Contempo Homes(Alexander Village&Vista Estates)City
of Palm Springs,January 27,2005.
Notes: 1 Delay is measured in seconds
2 LOS=Level of Service
3 Movement:Ell LTR=Eastbound combination left through right turn lane
4 Peak HounThe highest traffic volumefrom 11-1PMfor Midday andfrom 4-6PMfor PM
fl`-
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,�005 • �! y
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-13
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
TABLE 4-7
EXISTING+PROJECT+CUMULATIVE SEGMENT ADT VOLUMES
I-10 Via Escuela Farrell Vista Chino Wlutewater
Club
Via Escuela Vista Chino Gene Autry Via Escuela Gene Autry
Trail Trail
Major Major Major Collector Collector
Thorou hfare Thoroughfare Thoroughfare
2 2 4+TWLTL 2 2
20,353 18,606 35,143 954 4,295
�• 2/23/04 2/23/04 1/29/04 1/18/05 1/18/05
242 242 606 606 545
20,595 18,848 35,749 1,560 4,840
3,958 3,998 3,615 85 156
( ) 24,553 22,846 39,364 1,645 4,996
Source:LOS Engineering,Inc.Draft Traffic Impact Analysis,Contempo Homes(Alexander Village£a Vista Estates)City
of Palm Springs,January 27,2005.
Notes:T WLTL=Two way left tum lane
Build-out(year 2025) Conditions
As directed by the City of Palms Springs Traffic Engineering Official, Build-Out (Year
2025) conditions were analyzed using CVAG year 2020 ADTs,which were forecasted up
to year 2025 conditions. The year 2025 ADTs were determined using a two step process:
1) calculating a growth factor between existing ADTs and the CVAG 2020 ADTs and 2)
factoring up the 2020 ADTs to year 2025 by the aforementioned growth factor. The
build-out (Year 2025) intersection volumes were factored up from existing turn-moves
based on the increase in ADT (existing to year 2025) for each intersection approach. The
roadway ADTs for build-out conditions are shown in Table 4-9 (Existing + Project
Segment ADT Volumes),
Intersection LOS, calculated without and with the addition of project traffic, is shown in
Table 4-8 (Build-Out Year 120251 With & Without Project Intersection Volumes & LOS). All
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005• r
TKC 40778.05 Page 4114
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ':' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ':'
intersection LOS calculations were made using existing geometric conditions. For
intersections with unacceptable LOS operations, new LOS operations were calculated
with additional lanes.
TABLE 4-8
Build-Out Year(2025) With&Without Project Intersection Volumes &LOS
Movement Peak 2025
7
1)Farrel Drive All Midday 143.1 F 144.8 F 1.7 No
@ Vista Chino All PM 127.4 F 132.3 F 4.9 Yes
With 2025 Mitigation All Midday 46.0 D 47.5 D 1.5 No
All PM 48.1 D 48.8 D 0.7 No
2)Gene Autry @ All Midday 162.3 F 40.7 D 1.7 No
Vista Chino All PM 279.7 F 46.9 D 1.8 No
3)White Water Club SB LR Midday >50 F >50 F >2.0 Yes
Dr.
@ Vista Chino SB LR PM >50 F >50 F >2.0 Yes
With 2025 Mitigation All Midday 6.6 A 7.2 A 0.6 No
All PM 7.5 A 8.7 A 1.2 No
4)Whitewater Club Dr. EB LT Midday >50 F >50 F >2.0 Yes
@ Via Escuela WB LTR Midday >50 F >50 F >2.0 Yes
EB LT PM >50 F >50 F >2.0 Yes
WB LTR PM >50 F >50 F >2.0 Yes
With 2025 Mitigation All Midday 10.5 B 11.0 B 0.5 No
All PM 33.3 C 33.5 C 0.2 No
5)Whitewater Club Dr. All Midday 7.9 A 8.2 A 0.3 No
@ Via Escuela All PM 8.7 A 9.0 A 0.3 No
6)Amico Street @ NB LTR Midday 10.3 B 10.7 B 0.4 No
Via Escuela SB LR Midday 10.4 B 10.7 B 0.3 No
NB LTR PM 11.2 B 12.0 B 0.8 No
SB LR PM 11.2 B 11.8 B 0.6 No
7)Project Driveway SB LR Midday DNE DNE 9.6 A NA NA
@ Via Escuela SB LR AM DNE DNE 12.0 B NA NA
Source:LOS Engineering,Inc.Draft Traffic Impact Analysis,Coutempo Homes (Alexander Village&Vista Estates)City
of Palm Springs,January 27,2005.
Notes: 1 Delay is measured in seconds
2 LOS=Level of Service
1
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-15 lN�
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTALANALYSIS ❖
! 3 Delta=The increase in delayfrom the project
4 Impact resulting from the project?(yes or no)
5 Movement:EB LTR=Eastbound combination left through right turn lane
6 Peak Hour—The highest traffic volume from Il-IPM forMidday and from 4-6PM for PM
TABLE 4-9
EXISTING+PROJECT SEGMENT ADT VOLUMES
CHINOSTREET GENE GENE VISTA WHITEWATER VIA
CLUB •
TRAIL TRAIL From I-10 Via Escuela Farrell Vista Chino WhClub er
Club
To Via Escuela Vista Chino Trail Gene Autry Via Escuela Gene Autry
Trail
Build-Out(Year 55,322 49,597 59,447 1,500 5,742
2025)ADT
Project ADT 242 242 606 606 545
Build-Out(Year
2025)+Project 55,564 49,839 60,053 2,106 6,287
ADT
Source:LOS Engineering,Inc.Draft Traffic Impact Analysis,Contempo Homes(Alexander Village£r Vista
Estates)City of Palm Springs,January 27,2005.
Notes:TWLTL=Two-way left turn lane
Under build-out (Year 2025) without project conditions, the study intersections were
calculated to operate at acceptable LOS with the exception of the following intersections:
1) Farrell Drive at Vista Chino with existing signalized geometry (LOS F AM and
PM),
2) Gene Autry at Vista Chino with existing un-signalized geometry (LOS F AM and
PM),
3) Whitewater Club Drive at Vista Chino with existing un-signalized geometry (LOS
F AM and PM), and
4) Gene Autry at Via Escuela with existing un-signalized geometry (LOS F AM and
PM).
Under build-out (Year 2025) with project conditions, the study intersections were
calculated to operate at acceptable LOS with the exception of the following intersections:
q 1
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC40778.05 Page4-16
INITIAL STUDY(ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •A ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
1) Farrell Drive at Vista Chino with existing signalized geometry (LOS F AM and
PM) with more than 2.0 seconds of project related delay added during the PM
peak period considered to have a lone-term cumulative impact,
2) Gene Autry at Vista Chino with existing un-signalized geometry (LOS F AM and
PM) with less than 2.0 seconds of project related delay added; therefore,
considered to not have a cumulative impact,
3) Whitewater Club Drive at Vista Chino with existing un-signalized geometry (LOS
F AM and PM)with more than 2.0 seconds of project related delay added during
the PM peak period considered to have a long-term cumulative impact, and
4) Gene Autry at Via Escuela with existing un-signalized geometry (LOS F AM and
PM) with more than 2.0 seconds of project related delay added during the PM
peak period considered to have a long-term cumulative impact.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project is considered to have caused a significant traffic impact if the new project has
decreased the operations on the study area intersections to worse than LOS D. If a
significant impact is calculated due to the addition of project traffic, then a feasible
mitigation is required the operation to LOS D.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion
at intersections)?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: It was estimated
that the proposed project would generate an average of 1,211 trips per day,
contributing to an increase in traffic at the above described study area
intersections, which are currently operating at an acceptable level of service
(LOS), with the exception of the un-signalized intersection of Gene Autry Trail
and Via Escuela which now operates at LOS F. The addition of the proposed
project is anticipated to create an additional delay of more than 2.0 seconds at the
Gene Autry TrailNia Escuela intersection.
It was recommended that the project install a traffic signal at the Gene Autry
Trail/Via Escuela intersection to reduce the direct project traffic impact to a level
of less significant impact. If the project installs the traffic signal, reimbursement
would be requested of other future development projects in the area that may be
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-17 , ��
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ':•
required to pay a fair share contribution (TUMF Fees) to this signal. In addition,
the northbound and southbound approaches at this intersection each would
require a left turn lane and combination thru-right turn lane to meeting an
acceptable LOS.
b) Would the project exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or
highways?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Under existing
plus project plus cumulative conditions, the study intersections were calculated
to operate at acceptable LOS with the exception of Gene Autry Trail at Vista
Chino, which is calculated to operate at LOS E (PM), and Whitewater Club at
Vista Chino and Gene Autry Trail at Via Escuela, which are both calculated to
operate at LOS F (AM and PM) due to the addition of cumulative project traffic.
The project would add traffic cumulatively to these intersections. It is therefore
recommended that the project pay into the Coachella Valley Association of
Governments Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF), to mitigate the
build-out cumulative project impacts to a less than significant level.
c) Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase
in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact: The proposed project is located approximately one mile from the
Palm Springs International Airport and is not in the path of direct over-flights.
The development of 117 residential units, proposed by the project would not
result in a substantial increase in air passengers or flight volume. For these
reasons, the project will have no impact on air traffic patterns, levels or safety
risks and no mitigation is required.
d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses (e.g.farm equipment)?
Less Than Significant Impact: All streets proposed by the project are linear and
there are no curves that would cause sight distance or other safety concerns.
Project entries intersect at 90 degrees with existing roads. hi addition, standard
City protocol requires all engineered street plans to be reviewed and approved
by the City's Public Works Department before any construction can occur.
Project land uses are compatible with those around it so no vehicular
incompatibilities are evident. For these reasons, project implementation would
not create unsafe design features or incompatible uses that would substantially
increase traffic safety hazards and no mitigation is required.
s 1
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-18
''r d
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT + ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS•:'
e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Less Than Significant Impact: Prior to approval, the City of Palm Springs
requires that all projects undergo review by the Palm Springs Fire Department
(PSFD), which typically conditions projects with requirements to ensure
adequate emergency access. The project provides three points of vehicular
access and interior streets of the project have been designed to be consistent with
standard PSFD guidelines. For these reasons, project implementation would not
result in inadequate emergency access and no mitigation is required.
fl Would the project result in inadequate parking capacity?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project would comply with the City of Palm
Springs Municipal Code parking requirements for single family residences. The
parking requirements are based on the number of single family residential units
along with a factor for guest parking and will be evaluated by the City during its
development review process. A typical single family residence with a two-car
garage will accommodate four on-site spaces (two inside the garage and two on
the driveway apron), which satisfies the parking needs of a typical single family
residence. For these reasons, project implementation would not exceed parking
capacity requirements and no mitigation is required.
g) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Less Than Significant Impact: Public transit service is provided to the project
area by the StulLine Transit Agency. The nearest bus stop to the sites of the
proposed projects is located approximately 1,200 feet south of Via Escuela near
the intersection of Vista Chino and Gene Autry Trail. Consultations with the
SunLine Transit Agency resulted in their finding that the proposed projects are
not in conflict with their goals and objectives related to ensuring that new
development provides pedestrian pathways and connections that facilitate
public access to their facilities. Given the foregoing, project implementation
would not conflict with adopted alternative transportation policies, plans or
programs and no mitigation is required.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
All vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the project(s) has been designed per the
City of Palm Springs Roadway Standards.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-19 �
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •:+ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS+
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
SC 2-1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall
participate in fair share funding in the phased construction of off-site traffic
signals and improvements that are needed to serve cumulative future
conditions through the payment of appropriate fees, including City and
County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee(TUMF).
MITIGATION MEASURES
MM 2-1 Prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy, the project proponent shall
comply with the traffic improvement mitigation requirements set forth in
the following documents: LOS Engineering, Inc. Draft Traffic Impact Analysis,
Contempo Homes (Alexander Village & Vista Estates) City of Palm Springs,
January 27, 2005 and LOS Engineering, Inc. TTM 30350, Alexander Vista
Estates/Alexander Village Traffic Study Comment Responses,April 28,2005.
The subject measures are summarized below:
• The project shall install a traffic signal at the Gene Autry Trail/Via
Escuela intersection, the cost of which shall be reimbursed by other
developments required to pay a fair share contribution for this signal.
1
• The northbound and southbound approaches to the Gene Autry
Trail/Via Escuela intersection, shall have left turn lanes and
combination thru-right turn lanes.
• On-site traffic signing/striping shall be implemented in conjunction
with detailed construction plans for the proposed project site.
• Prior to the issuance of grading permits, sight distance at the project
access shall be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans/City of Indio
sight distance standards.
With incorporation of the above mitigation measures, the proposed project would have
a less than significant impact on traffic and circulation in the project vicinity. With the
installation of a traffic signal at the Gene Autry Trail/Via Escuela intersection,
development of the project (though temporarily constraining traffic during construction)
will serve to improve the existing traffic conditions at the Gene Autry Trail/Via Escuela
intersection,which is currently operating at LOS F. With installation of the traffic signal,
traffic conditions at the intersection are expected to operate at LOS A during the Midday
Peak Hour and a LOS B during PM Peak Hour.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-20 ,A nr
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ,• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
4.3 AIR QUALITY
Information for this section was taken in part from the following sources:
1. The City of Palm Springs, The City of Palm Springs General Plan, March, 1993.
2. Pacific Municipal Consultants, Urbemis 2002 for Windows 7.4.2 (Alexander Village
and Alexander Vista Estates), April 3,2005.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The California Air Resources Board's air quality monitoring program collects accurate
real-time measurements of ambient level pollutants at over 40 sites located throughout
the state. The data generated is used to define the nature and severity of pollution in
California; determine which areas of California are in attainment or non-attainment;
identify pollution trends in the state; support agricultural burn forecasting; and develop
air models and emission inventories. Existing levels of ambient air quality and historical
trends and projections in the project area are best represented by measurements made
by the SCAQMD at its Palm Springs air monitoring station, located at 590 E Racquet
Club Ave., approximately 2 miles west of the proposed project.
Air pollutants monitored at the Palm Springs Monitoring Station include CO, NO2, 03,
PMio and PM25. Table 4-10 (Air Quality Monitoring Summary for the Palm Springs
Monitoring Station) presents the last four years of published data for the Palm Springs
Monitoring Station. These measurements have shown that photochemical smog levels
(mainly Os) are high in summer, dust levels may exceed particulate standards
throughout the year, and primary vehicular pollutant levels (e.g., CO and NO2) are very
low in the area.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following criteria are identified as thresholds for determining the significance of air
quality impacts if it were to: 1) Result in an adverse effect on existing air quality (e.g, 500
or more dwelling units), and 2) Result in an adverse effect to a sensitive use (e.g., school)
located near a major air pollutant emission source. Presented in the SCAQMD CEQA
Air Quality Handbook is both a methodology for the quantification of project-related air
quality impacts and recommended thresholds to evaluate the significance of those
emissions.
J
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-21
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT -.*- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
TABLE 4-10
AIR QUALITY MONITORING SUMMARY
FOR THE PALM SPRINGS MONITORING STATION:2000,2001,2002 and 2003*
(Number of Days Standards Were Exceeded and
Maximum Levels During Such Violations')
STATE • FEDERAL ttt 2001 2002tt
POLLUTANT •
Ozone(03)
State 1-hour>0.09 40 53 49 24*
Federal 1-hour>0.12 ppm 0 6 2 0*
Max.1-hour cone.(ppm) 0.12 0.137 0.136 0.12*
Carbon Monoxide(CO)
State 8-hour>9.0 ppm 0 0 0 0
State 1-hour>20 ppm 0 0 0 0
Federal 8-hour>9.5 ppm 0 0 0 0
Federal'-hour>35ppm 0 0 0 **
Max.1-hour cone. (ppm) 3 2 2 **
Max. 8-hour cone. (ppm) 1.6 1.5 1.2 1.3
Nitrogen Dioxide(NO2)
State 1-hour>0.25(ppm) 0 0 0 0
r'^
Max. 1-hour cone. (ppm) 0.07 0,08 0.10 0.07
.� Sulfur Dioxide(SO2)
State 1-hour>0.25 (ppm) NM NM NM NM
State 24-hour>0.05(ppm) NM NM NM NM
Federal 24-hour>0.14(ppm) NM NM NM NM
Max. 1-hour cone. (ppm) NM NM NM NM
Max.24-hour cone. (ppm) NM NM NM NM
Inhalable Particulates (PMro)3
State 24-hour>50 V)g/m3 0 1(2) 3(5.1) **
Federal 24-hour>150(egg/m3) 0 0 0 *"
Max.24-hour cone. (e /m3) 44 53 75 309*
Source:Air Quality Data,Indio and Palm Springs Monitoring Stations SCAQMD.
* Monitoring Results followed by an asterisk indicates that no monitoring for that pollutant occurred at the Palm
Springs Station and that the values presented are from monitoring results obtained at the Indio Station.
** Data not yet available
Notes:
1. With the exception of inhalable particulates(PMio),all values are based on 365 days per year.
2. NM means Not Monitored at either location.
3. Violations are in terms of number/percent of samples.
t j
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-22 ? ;
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •:' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
In Chapter 6 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook,the SCAQMD has established
two types of air pollution thresholds (i.e., emission thresholds and additional indicators)
to assist local governmental agencies in determining whether the projected emissions
from the operational phase of a project will be significant. As stated in the SCAQMD
CEQA Air Quality Handbook, "if the lead agency finds that the operational phase of a
project has the potential to exceed either of the air pollution thresholds, the project
should be considered significant. Both types of threshold factors are discussed below.
Separate threshold standards have been recommended for assessing construction
impacts that are averaged over a 3-month period and include only actual worldng days.
Specific criteria air pollutants have been identified by the SCAQMD as pollutants of
special regional concern. Based on this categorization, Table 4-11 (Emission Significance
Thresholds) lists the following significance thresholds for emissions from these
pollutants.
Table 4-11
EMISSION SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS
Pollutant Construction Criteria Operational Criteria
d.
CO 550 550
NO. 100 55
ROG 75 55
SO= 150 150
PM10 150 150
Source: SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook,Chapter 6.
Note: The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook does not list daily construction criteria for SO.. This value is
extrapolated from the quarterly criterion.
As indicated in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, "the District considers a
project to be mitigated to a level of insignificance if its impact is mitigated below the
thresholds defined in Chapter 6 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook."
Additional Indicators (Secondary Effects). The SCAQMD recommends that "additional
indicators" be used as screening criteria with respect to air quality. Relevant additional
factors identified in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook include the following
significance criteria: 1) interference with the attainment of the federal or State ambient
air quality standards by either violating or contributing to an existing or projected air
�1
quality violation; 2) generation of vehicle trips that cause a CO "hot spot'; 3) creation of
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-23 '`
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT -.*- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS V
or subject receptors to an objectionable odor that requires a 10:1 dilution with fresh air
before being no longer detectable; 4) introduction of hazardous materials onsite that
could result in an accidental release of air toxic emissions or acutely hazardous materials
posing a threat to public health and safety; 5) emissions of an air toxic contaminant
regulated by SCAQMD rules or included on a federal or State air toxic list; 6) the
burning of hazardous, medical, or municipal waste as in waste-to-energy facilities;
and/or, 7) emissions of carcinogenic or toxic air contaminants that individually or
cumulatively exceed the maximum individual cancer risk of 10 in 1 million.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
plan?
Less Than Significant Impact: 1990 amendments to the federal Clean Air Act,
Section 176 required the USEPA to promulgate rules to ensure that federal
actions conform to the appropriate State Implementation Plan (SIP). These rules,
known together as the General Conformity Rule (40 CFR SS 51.850-.860 and 40
CFR SS 93.156-.160) require any federal agency responsible for an action in a
nonattainment are to determine that the action conforms to the applicable SIP or
that the action is exempt from the General Conformity Rule requirements. This
means that federally supported or funded activities will not (1) cause or
contribute to any new air quality standard violation, (2) increase the frequency or
severity of any existing standard violation, or (3) delay the timely attainment of
any standard, interim emission reduction, or other milestone. Actions would
conform to a SIP and be exempt from a conformity determination if an
applicability analysis shows that the total direct and indirect emissions from the
project construction and operation activities would be less that specifies emission
rate thresholds, known as de minimis limits, and that the emissions would be less
than 10%of the area emissions budget.
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is responsible for state air quality
programs but generally retains authority over statewide programs such as motor
vehicle emission standards while air quality monitoring, stationary source
permitting and enforcement, or basin-wide air quality planning are subordinated
to local air pollution control districts (APCD) or air quality management districts
(AQMD).
The project is within the jurisdiction of the South County Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD). The SCQAMD Governing Board adopted the
2003 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) on August 1, 2003. The 2003 AQMP
i
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates duly,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-24 "'
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ':• ENVIRONMENTALANALYSIS':•
updates the attainment demonstration for federal standards for ozone and PM1o;
replaces the 1997 attainment demonstration for the federal carbon monoxide
(CO) standard and provides a basis for a maintenance plan for CO for the future;
and updates the maintenance plan for the federal nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
standard that the South Coast Air Basin has met since 1992. The revision of the
AQMP points to the urgent need of additional emissions reductions (beyond
those incorporated in the 1997/99 Plan) from all sources, specifically those under
the jurisdiction of the California Air Resources Board and the US EPA which
account for approximately 80 percent of the ozone precursor emissions in the
Basin(www.admd.gov/aamn/).
The proposed project is the 118 single-family residential Alexander Village and
Alexander Vista Estates. Following construction, the main air pollutants
generated in association with the proposed project would be traffic-related.
Emissions from the project would be within established thresholds (refer to -
discussion under item b, below). Therefore, the project is not anticipated to
conflict with or obstruct implementation of 2003 AQMP. This impact is
considered less than significant.
b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
i
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated:
Short Term Construction-Related Impacts
The Federal and California State Ambient Air Quality Standards for important
pollutants are summarized in Table 4-12 (Federal and State Ambient Air Quality
Standards)which follows and described in detail thereafter.
1
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-25 J
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT +. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ❖
TABLE 4-12
FEDERAL AND STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
STANDARDFEDERAL PRIMARY STATE
POLLUTANT AVERAGING TIME
D•
Ozone(Oa) 1-Hour 0.12 ppm 0.09 PPM
8-HouR 0.08 PPM --
Carbon Monoxide 8-Hour 9.0 ppm 9.0 ppm
(CO) 1-Hour 35.0 ppm 20.0 ppm
Nitrogen Oxide Annual 0.05 ppm
(NO.) 1-Hour -- 0.25 ppm
Annual 0.03 ppm --
Sulfur Dioxide(S02) 24-Hour 0.14 ppm 0.04 ppm
1-Hour -- 0.25 ppro.
PMio Annual 50 µg/m3 20 µg/m3
24-HOUR 150 /m3 50 m3
PM 2.5 ANNUAL 15 µg/m3 12 µg/m3
24-HOUR 65 /m3
Lead 30-Day Avg. 1.5 µg/m3
Month Avg. 1.5 /m3
Source., California Air Resources Board,"Ambient Air Quality Standards,"July 9,2003.
ppm=parts per million
µghn3=Micrograms per Cubic Meter
Ozone (03) is the most prevalent of a class of photochemical oxidants formed
in the urban atmosphere. The creation of ozone is a result of complex
chemical reactions between hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen in the
presence of sunshine. Unlike other pollutants, ozone is not released directly
into the atmosphere from any sources. The major sources of oxides of
nitrogen and reactive hydrocarbons, known as ozone precursors, are
combustion sources such as factories and automobiles, and evaporation of
solvents and fuels. The health effects of ozone are eye irritation and damage
to lung tissues.
Carbon Monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless, toxic gas formed by
incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. CO concentrations are generally
higher in the winter, when meteorological conditions favor the build-up of
directly emitted contaminants. CO health warning and emergency episodes
occur almost entirely during the winter. The most significant source of
carbon monoxide is gasoline powered automobiles, as a result of inefficient
fuel usage in internal combustion engines. Various industrial processes also
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 ,
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-26 '
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENII' ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':'
emit carbon monoxide.
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) the primary receptors of ultraviolet light initiating
the photochemical reactions to produce smog. Nitric oxide combines with
oxygen in the presence of reactive hydrocarbons and sunlight to form
nitrogen dioxide and ozone. Oxides of nitrogen are contributors to other air
pollution problems including: high levels of fine particulate matter, poor
visibility and acid deposition.
Sulfur Dioxide (S02) results from the combustion of high sulfur content
fuels. Fuel combustion is the major source of S02, while chemical plants,
sulfur recovery plants, and metal processing are minor contributors. Sulfates
result from a relation of sulfur dioxide and oxygen in the presence of
sunlight. S02 levels are generally higher in the winter than in the summer
(when sunlight is plentiful and sulfate is more readily formed).
Particulate Matter(PMio and PM2s) consists of particles in the atmosphere as
a by-product of fuel combustion, through abrasion such as tire wear, and
through soil erosion by wind. Particulates can also be formed through
photochemical reactions in the atmosphere. PM,o refers to finely divided
solids or liquids such as soot, dust, and aerosols which are 10 microns or less
`r in diameter and can enter the lungs. Fine particles are those less than 2.5
micrometers in diameter and are also referred to as PM2s.
Lead is found in old paints and coatings, plumbing and a variety of other
materials. Once in the blood stream, lead can cause damage to the brain,
nervous system, and other body systems. Children are most susceptible to
the effects of lead. The South County Air Basin and Riverside County
portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin are in attainment for the federal and State
standards for lead.
The SCQAMD has established significance thresholds for operational and
construction-related emissions. Daily and quarterly thresholds are
established. Since a projects 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 4-13.
j
,Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-27
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1
TABLE 4-13
EMISSIONS SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD CRITERIA(POUNDS/DAY)
POLLUTANT CO • NO. • 1
Operational
Emissions
Pounds/Day 550 55 55 150 150
Construction
Emissions Now
Pounds/Day 550 1 75 100 150 150
Source: SCQAMD,CEQA Air Quality Handbook,November 1993.
Projects in the Coachella Valley with peak(highest daily)operation-related emissions that exceed any of
these emissions thresholds should be considered significant.
Construction activities are a minor source of organic gas emissions. Solvents
in adhesives,non-water based paints,thinners, some insulating materials and
caulking materials would evaporate into the atmosphere and would
participate in the photochemical reaction that creates urban ozone. Asphalt
used in paving is also a source of organic gases for a short time after its
application.
4
The URBEMIS-2002 for Windows (Version 7.4.2) program estimates
maximum emissions from site grading, construction worker trips, stationary
and mobile equipment, architectural coatings and asphalt off-gassing.
URBEMIS 2002 was used to estimate potential emissions for the proposed
project. Emissions from construction activities (grading and building), area
sources (consumer products) and operations (vehicles) are provided in Table
4-14. These calculations assume that no demolition will be necessary as the
project site is currently vacant. Construction would occur over a 24-month
period with full project occupancy estimated in June 2008.
E�
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-28 �' � 2
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT ':' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':•
TABLE 4-14
ESTIMATED EMISSIONS RESULTING FROM PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES(POUNDS/DAY)
ROG NOxCO SOZ 0
TOTAL
S/W S/W S/W S/W S/W S/W S/W
2006 20.17 147.29 156.89 0.00 368.92 6.61 362.31
Construction
2007
Construction 15.08 102.57 120.33 0.00 4.34 4.25 0.09
Construction
2008 245.14 98.84 127.90 0.01 4.04 3.86 0.18
Construction
Area Source
Emissions 6.00 5.89 1.50 1.48 1.69 0.63 0.03 0.0 0.00 0.00 NIA N/A NIA N/A
Operational
(Vehicle) 11.70 10.04 11.17 16.90 138.68 120.61 0.09 0.07 12.29 12.29 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Emissions
Sum of Area&
Operational 17.71 15.93 12.67 18.38 140.37 121.24 0.12 0.07 12.30 12.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Emissions
� - Key., S=Summer;W=Winter;NIA=Not Applicable
The major air quality impacts resulting from project construction would be
increased CO, PMio, NO., and ROG emissions primarily from off-road diesel
construction equipment and fugitive dust. As shown in Table 4-14, thresholds
would be exceeded on a pounds per day basis for ROG (245.14 lbs/day vs.
threshold of 75 lbs/day), NO. (147.29 and 102.57 lbs/day vs. threshold of 100
lbs/day), and PMio (368.92 lbs/day vs. threshold of 150 lbs/day). Based on the
foregoing, without mitigation, project construction emissions would significant.
As a consequence, mitigation consistent with the provisions of the South Coast Air
Quality Management District CEQA Handbook will be required to ensure the
preclusion of a significant impact on air quality. Please see Mitigation Measures
below.
As indicated in Table 4-14, the project would be within all thresholds for
operational emissions. Therefore, operational air quality impacts are considered
less than significant.
c) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or
f ,
)
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-29 t ' '
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ❖
state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Less Than Significant Impact: Since the number of dwelling units proposed by
the projects are consistent with the City General Plan land use and density, they
represent an increment of growth that is planned by CVAG and the cumulative
regional impact of project growth is considered to be less-than-significant. Air
pollutants will be controlled to the maximum extent practical by adherence to the
goals and policies contained in the Palm Springs General Plan along with
mitigation measures described within this document. For these reasons, the
project's cumulative air quality impacts are considered less than significant.
d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact: There are no schools, hospitals, nursing homes,
parks or other sensitive receptors within one mile of the proposed project, and
the project itself will not create substantial pollutant concentrations, therefore the
proposed project will not impact sensitive receptors.
e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project does not include any land
uses that are typically associated with objectionable odors. During project
construction idling equipment and vehicles, particularly those which are diesel,
may generate noticeable odors. However, such occurrences would be intermittent,
and of limited duration and therefore they would be considered less than
significant.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
There are no special project design features related to air quality.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
There are no Standard Conditions or Requirements related to air quality.
MITIGATION MEASURES
MM 3-1 To the extent feasible, the project contractor shall use the following
equipment to reduce and methods to reduce construction emissions:
r �
t
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 J,,"!WJ/1
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-30
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS•S
Measures to mitigate for off-road mobile source emissions (Table 11-3 of
SCABMD CEQA Handbook):
• Methane-fueled pile drivers.
• Use electricity from power poles rather than temporary diesel or gasoline
power generators.
• Use methanol or natural gas on-site mobile equipment instead of diesel.
• Use propane or butane-powered on-site mobile equipment instead of
gasoline.
To mitigate for PMia Emissions:
Grading
• Apply non-toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specification
to all inactive construction areas(previously graded areas inactive for ten
days or more).
• Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
• Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic soils binders
according to manufacturers' specifications, to exposed piles (i.e., gravel,
sand, dirt) with 5% or greater silt content.
• Water active sites at least twice daily.
• Suspend all excavating and grading operations when wind speeds (as
instantaneous gusts)exceed 25 mph.
• Monitor for particulate emissions according to District-specified
procedures. Contact the District for more information at(714)396-3600.
Streets
• Sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried onto
adjacent public paved roads (recommend water sweepers with reclaimed
water).
• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto
paved roads, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site each trip.
• Apply water three times daily, or non-toxic soil stabilizers according to
manufacturers' specifications, to all unpaved parking or staging areas or
unpaved road surfaces.
• Traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to be reduced to 15 mph or less.
• Pave construction roads that have a traffic volume of more than 50 daily,
trips by construction equipment, 150 total daily trips for all vehicles.
1
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,20065
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-31
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ':` ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
• Pave all construction access roads at least 100 feet on to the site from the
main road.
• Pave construction roads that have a daily traffic volume of less than 50
vehicle trips.
MM 3-2 The following measures from the District's Rule 403, Table 1 Best Available
Control Measures (Applicable to All Construction Activity) shall also be
implemented:
• Stabilize backfill material during handling and at completion of activity.
• Pre-water soils prior to cut and fill activities.
• Stabilize wind erodible surfaces to reduce dust.
• Stabilize surface soils where support equipment and vehicles will
operate.
• Stabilize disturbed soils throughout the construction site.
• Pre-apply water and re-apply water as necessary to maintain soils during
earth-moving activities. Visible emissions shall not exceed 100 feet in any
direction.
• Maintain at least six feet of freeboard on haul vehicles.
• Stabilize stockpiled soils.
• Limit vehicular travel to established unpaved roads (haul routes) and
unpaved parking lots.
The above measures shall be implemented during all grading and construction phases of
the project and enforced/monitored by the City of Palm Springs and the SCAQMD.
Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce construction-related
emissions in accordance with the reduction efficiencies shown in Tables 11-3 and 11-4 of
the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook. These measures are considered adequate by the
District to reduce emissions to less than significant. Impacts will be reduced to less than
significant after implementation of the mitigation measures.
4.4 NOISE
Information in this section is derived from the following document:
Eilar Associates, Acoustical Analysis Report, Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates,
January 27,2005
The above document is available for public inspection during normal business hours at
the following locations:
City of Palm Springs Department of Planning and Building, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-32
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
Way,Palm Springs, California 92263.
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Tribal Planning, Building & Engineering
Department, 650 East Tahquitz Canyon Way,Palm Springs, California 92262.
Bureau of Indian Affairs Palm Springs Agency, 901 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite C-
101,Palm Springs,California 92263.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The primary noise source in the vicinity of the project sites is automobile and truck
traffic on Gene Autry Trail and Via Escuela. Verona Road, to the north and Whitewater
Club Drive, west of the project sites are residential streets with minimal traffic activity
and are, therefore, considered to have a negligible noise impact on the property. Noise
associated with aircraft over-flight operations from Palm Springs Regional Airport is
insignificant as the project site is approximately 1 mile north of the airport and located
outside of the 60 CNEL airport noise contour.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
} The State of California and City of Palm Springs have established guidelines and/or
standards for acceptable community noise levels which are based on the Community
Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) rating scale. For residential uses such as the proposed
projects addressed herein, the City's standards for maximum noise levels are 65 CNEL
for exterior living areas and 45 CNEL for interior living areas.
The City of Palm Springs has adopted numerous noise policies designed to achieve the
City's noise objectives. The following noise policies set forth in the Noise Element of the
General Plan could be relevant to the proposed project.
Policy 6.20.1 directs that noise-sensitive land uses such as residences, hospitals and
convalescent homes be protected from unacceptable noise levels from both existing and
future noise sources. The proposed project does not involve any unusual noise levels
and would generate long term operational noise levels that are comparable to those
found in surrounding neighborhoods.
Policy 6.20.6 directs that project design include measures which assure adequate interior
noise levels as required by Title 25 (California Noise Insulation Standards). The
proposed project will be required to comply with these standards as part of building
permit approvals.
Policy 6.24.1 requires that construction activities which may impact adjacent residential
units be limited to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. during weekdays and Saturdays,except under special
+� 1
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 "1` h 7R�
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-33
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT '.• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':•
circumstances approved by the City, and prohibited on Sundays and holidays. The
proposed project will comply with all City noise regulations including hours of
operation for construction activities.
Policy 6.24.2 requires that construction activities incorporate feasible and practical
techniques which minimize the noise impacts on adjacent uses. For these reasons,
project implementation will not result in the generation of noise levels that exceed City
standards and no mitigation is required.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess
of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated:
Exterior Noise—Alexander Village
Exterior noise levels at this project site are primarily the result of automobile and
truck traffic traveling on Gene Autry Trail and Via Escuela. Without mitigation
or proposed project structures, the future 75, 70 and 65 CNEL contours will be
located on the Alexander Village property, while the future 60 CNEL contour
will be located on both the Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates
properties. For a graphical representation of these contours, please refer to
Figure 10 (Future CNEL Contours and Noise Measurement Location Without Proposed
Mitigation).
Outdoor use areas located on the eastern section of the Alexander Village project
site, adjacent to Gene Autry Trail, represent worst case noise impacts. Without
mitigation, outdoor use areas nearest to Gene Autry Trail will be exposed to
future traffic noise levels exceeding the city of Palm Springs 65 CNEL limit for
outdoor use areas. Mitigation to provide an exterior noise level below 65 CNEL
will be necessary for these outdoor use areas. This mitigation shall consist of a
540-foot long, 12-foot high sound attenuation barrier along the eastern property
line, adjacent to Gene Autry Trail. The height of this sound attenuation barrier is
given in relation to the finished grade elevation. With the sound attenuation
barrier recommendation, outdoor use areas will experience traffic-related noise
levels below 65 CNEL and thus be in compliance with the City of Palm Springs
outdoor use area noise level requirement.
Outdoor use areas located on the Alexander Vista Estates project site will be
impacted by noise levels below 65 CNEL, in compliance with the City of Palm
Springs outdoor use noise requirement. No exterior mitigation is required for
this project site.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-34
INITIAL STUDWENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT S• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
Fi re 11 (Proposed Sound Attenuation Barrier Mitigation), shows future traffic
noise levels at outdoor use areas, with and without the recommended mitigation.
Interior
As indicated above, City of Palm Springs noise regulations require interior noise
levels in habitable residential space to be at or below 45 CNEL. Typical
residential construction generally achieves at least 15 dB. of noise attenuation in
rooms, even with windows open. Future traffic noise levels will be greater than
60 CNEL at some of the proposed Alexander Village building facades. Due to
the elevated exterior traffic noise levels at the project site, future interior noise
levels in some residences may exceed the City of Palm Springs and State of
California 45 CNEL limit for interior habitable residential space, with windows
in an open position.
An exterior-to-interior acoustical analysis will be necessary for Alexander Village
at the time final building plans become available to determine if special design
considerations (e.g. enhanced window glazing and mechanical ventilation) are
needed in order to achieve and maintain the noise attenuation necessary to
comply with applicable interior noise control building code standards.
Future noise levels are projected to be below 60 CNEL at all Alexander Vista
Estates building facades. As such, the project will comply with the City's 45
CNEL requirement for interior noise levels within proposed habitable residential
spaces, with windows open, an exterior-to-interior noise analysis will not be
necessary.
b) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-
borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact: Some temporary ground-borne vibration is
possible due to activities during project grading operations. Hours of operation
for construction equipment are restricted to weekday working hours by the
City's noise ordinance (Municipal Code Section 8.04.220). For these reasons,
temporary increases in ambient noise during project construction are considered
less than significant and no mitigation is required.
c) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less Than Significant Impact: Please see Item 4.4 (a) above.
d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
it
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates Jul F 1m
g Y� 005�.:
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-35
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •A ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
Less Than Significant Impact: Construction noise represents a short-term
impact on ambient noise levels. Noise generated by construction equipment,
including trucks, graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers and portable generators
can reach high levels. Grading activities typically represent one of the highest
potential sources for noise impacts. The most effective method of controlling
construction noise is through local control of construction hours and by limiting
the hours of construction to normal weekday working hours. The applicant will
be required to submit a construction plan showing construction hours (City of
Palm Springs Municipal Code, Chapter 8.04.220)which limits construction activities
to the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. In addition, the Noise Study recommends
that a final noise study be prepared prior to obtaining building permits for the
project. Noise impacts associated with construction activities are short-term
impacts and limiting hours of construction, should provide acceptable
mitigation.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is approximately I mile north of
( the Palm Springs International Airport and is located outside of the 60 CNEL
airport noise contour. Aircraft over-flight noise associated with the Palm Springs
International Airport has been evaluated in the Acoustical Analysis Report and is
considered insignificant at the project site.
p For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact: No private use airports are within two miles of the project site.
Therefore, the project will not be affected by significant noise from any private
use airport and no mitigation is required.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
There are no special project design features related to noise.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 LL
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-36
V
Ell
I MEN
01
D _.�_+u
JaglE
CNEL CONTOURS AND NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATION WITHOUT PROPOSED MITIGATION
ALEXANDER VILLAGEAND ALEXANDER VISTA ESTATES
40778.05 INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Future Exteri.,CNEL Will Sound Attenuation B arrier Mitigation i
^^'L� I��' I'" i' -•'.�M1.�
Retaivm Location Unmlti ateil CNEL Barrier Height
U }leer) F1i11gatei CNEL GyEv`,FKV ', ><`i_.1.- i,}?-I ;• 11,
R-2 Aaxander Mllage 62.2 ' 61.1 ry 16 A�_ Jr •`t^:^--. .•-^'4 Pr�
R-3 Aaxander Vtllage 649 627 f,='".+J'=�`'�`?•--1 Ib) \` F. �+
R-4 Aaxander Vdlage 676 12 640 ._:.,_;� ". R14
_ w
R-6 AexantlerVllage 71P 12 62.6 --'! ! - otsy, ?
R-6 AaxanderVllage Rii. a�+y,
R-7 Aaxander Vllage 754 12 643
R-B Aaxander Village 74.2 12 63.6 — t
R-9 Aaxander Vllage 661 12 64.7 � � _[ 3 f --�-y +� � ,•
R-10 Aaxander Vllage 652 12 634
R-11 Aexander Vila e 621610
R-12 Alexander Vsta Estates 603
5
R-13 AlexandeNista Estates fit6 ' 676
R-14 AlexantlerVsta ES,atas 697 56.7 - _- -- ___ - " �, �� •^(
'Unmitigated CNELlsm compliance,nomitigation is regwred at ihlslacd[ion
_ t -
-__-_-_. Alexander Vista .ter I �„� <^ .- -�-:�- ' r--� �` �r .;�._•\
Estates -" '�. �,._ :> •.r':`L '_>i ":?�, 4.-,.... �I '.x4,-. e R$ • �-•F;•
I 12-Foot High Sound Wall Z,
Alexander Village
12-Foot High �, ,-"'-- — --. r `-•—�—_5
Sound Wall R7
__ -.—_ b, J ti- _•..� - t
..r s I e r/ \ ••, l' L.ti_ v e _ x—' S.Yi`f ;.• p t "
K 0 i-
PROPOSED SOUND ATTENUATION BARRIER MITIGATION
0 I I NOT TO SCSLE
IA ,I :II � � Figure 17
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT -.*- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':•
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
SC 4-1 The project shall comply with the Construction Site Regulations (City of Palm
Springs Municipal Code, Chapter 8.04.220) which restrict the operation for
construction equipment between the hours of 5 p.m. and 8 a.m. if the noise
produced is of such intensity or quality that it disturbs the peace and quiet
of any other person of normal sensitivity. These requirements shall be
included on the contractor specifications and shall be verified by the
Building Official for both on site and offsite construction.
SC 4-2 Future on-site development shall comply with all relevant noise policies set
forth in the Palm Springs Noise Ordinance (City of Palm Springs Municipal
Code Chapter 11.74) to ensure that site operations do not create adverse noise
impacts beyond the site boundaries.
MITIGATION MEASURES
MM 4-1 All construction vehicles and equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within
1,000 feet of a dwelling shall be equipped with properly operating and
maintained mufflers. This requirement shall be included on the contractor
specifications and shall be verified by the Building Official.
+ MM 4-2 Stockpiling and/or vehicle staging areas shall be located onsite and as far as
practical from sensitive noise receptors (i.e. residential homes located south
and east of the project). This requirement shall be included on the contractor
specifications and shall be verified by the Building Official.
MM 4-3 Construction of a 12-foot high sound attenuation barrier along the eastern
property line, adjacent to Gene Autry Trail will be required as stated in the
acoustical analysis prepared for the project by Eilar Associates.
MM 4-4 An exterior-to-interior acoustical analysis will be necessary for Alexander
Village at the time final building plans become available to determine if
special design consideration (i.e. enhanced window glazing and mechanical
ventilation) is needed in order to achieve and maintain the noise attenuation
necessary to comply with applicable interior noise control building code
standards.
After application of Standard Conditions and Requirements, and the Mitigation
Measures outlined above, noise impacts were determined to be mitigated to a level of
less than significant.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-39 �,r r
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
4.5 VISUAL AESTHETICS AND COMMUNITY DESIGN
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project sites are located along the northern fringe of the primary Palm Springs urban
area. The topography of this site is on the valley floor of the Coachella Valley. The
geomorphology of this area is shaped by ancient flood events that formed elevated
alluvial plains at the base of the mountains and alluvial sand flats on the valley floor.
The project sites were part of the Whitewater River flood plain prior to the building of
the containment levee, comprising the project site's eastern boundary. The project site is
nearly level with less than one percent gradient with elevations ranging from about 479
feet above mean sea level (amsl) in the northwest corner to about 466 feet amsl on the
southeast corner.
Distal views from the project sites include the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains to
south and the Little San Bernardino Mountains to the north. Near and intermediate
views include the Whitewater River drainage channel to the east and northeast and
single family residential development to the west and south. Previous Figuare 4 (Plan
View Aerial of the Project Site) illustrates the spatial relationships between the project site
and features in the near and intermediate view-sheds.
i,
Gene Autry Trail borders a portion of the project sites to the east in a north-south
alignment. The Scenic Corridors Map, in Section II of the Palm Springs General Plan
identifies Gene Autry Trail as a City-designated Scenic Corridor. As such this roadway
has been designated by the City for scenic treatment and beautification. These streets
will be designed so as to take the fullest possible advantage of their scenic qualities by
such methods as providing greater set backs from the street, and by providing
landscaping to accent vistas and mask unsightly views.
In addition, these streets will serve as the basis for "links" incorporating a multiplicity of
functions, e.g., open-space, bike paths, pedestrian walks and linear parks. They will
relation both to recreational centers and other linkage systems, e.g. other streets, and
water courses.
With regard to the foregoing, it is noted that the Palm Springs General Plan Land Use
Exhibit designates a bikeway alignment along the entire length of Gene Autry Trail,
particularly in the vicinity of the project sites. Further, the subject exhibit also shows a
horse trial bikeway alignment along the aforementioned containment levee which
intersects Gene Autry Trail along the project site's eastern boundary.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-40
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 11ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 'S
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project may have a significant effect on Aesthetics if it adversely affects a scenic vista
or scenic highway; it has a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect; or creates obtrusive
light or glare.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project site is approximately 470
feet above mean sea level (amsl). The project site is relatively level and free of
substantial variation in topographic relief. A key relevant objective and policy
set forth in the Palm Springs General Plan regarding Scenic Corridors includes
the preservation of scenic vistas. As indicated above, the project sites are located
in close proximity to Gene Autry Trail, a City-designated Scenic Corridor. In this
regard, due to the similarity between roadway and on-site pad elevations (e.g.
475.8 street elevation,relative to a 469.0 pad elevation on site),the construction of
a six foot decorative perimeter wall around the project and anticipated structural
set backs exceeding 50 feet from the side of the road way at the same location,
travelers along Gene Autry Trail are not expected to have their view-sheds
impaired as a consequence of implementing the proposed projects. On this basis,
the proposed projects would have a less than substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista. Consequently, no additional analyses, or the imposition of
mitigation measures, are required.
However, as discussed in previous Section 4.4, Noise, the noise study prepared
for the proposed projects found that noise levels on the site of the proposed
projects are currently, and are expected to continue to be, in excess of allowable
residential exterior noise exposure levels (i.e. 65 CNEL) as defined by the City of
Palm Springs Noise Ordinance. As a result, in order to ensure that project
residents are not exposed to excessive noise levels, a 12 foot high sound
attenuation barrier would have to be constructed along the project site's Gene
Autry Trail frontage for a distance of approximately 540-feet. Given this,
travelers along Gene Autry Trail, esp. those that are southbound, would be
expected to have their view-sheds to the west somewhat impaired. For future
horse-trail bikeway users it is expected that westerly view-shed impairment
might even be more pronounced due to the relatively slower pace at which they
would be traveling. Although it is acknowledged that view-shed impairment for
travelers in the immediate vicinity of the subject noise attention barrier might be
substantial, due to the relatively limited length of the barrier in relation to the
over all length of the subject roadway and accompanying trail amenities, the net
overall effect is considered to be less than significant.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 n
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-41
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4:4 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4:4
As has been described previously, the sites of the proposed projects adjoin
existing residential development to the west and south. It is acknowledged that
nearby residents will experience a change in their view of the project site as it
converts from vacant to residential land use. The design proposed by the project,
along with standard conditions and requirements, are considered a reasonable
design response to views from neighboring residences and visual impacts on
adjacent homes are considered mitigated by project design features to a level
that is Jess than significant.
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Less Than Significant Impact: The subject property is vacant with desert scrub.
As such, there are no significant trees or historic buildings on the property. The
site is underlain with many feet of sand and silts deposited from the flood waters
of the Whitewater River. As a result, there are no rock outcroppings on the site.
No other significant scenic resource exists on the property.
c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site
and its surroundings?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is located on the fringe of urban
development adjacent to other housing developments in northern Palm Springs.
Development of the project site as proposed would occur in an area designated
by the City of Palm Springs General Plan for residential development. The
project would introduce an upscale residential neighborhood characterized by a
cohesive design theme and landscape enhancements along project entries and
interior streets.
Because the project site is already influenced by adjacent urban development and
because the project will meet a high standard of architectural design and
employs an extensive desert landscape theme, project implementation will not
substantially degrade the visual character of the site or its surroundings and no
additional mitigation is required.
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project has the potential to create
new sources of light and glare that could adversely affect adjacent residences and
roadways as well as night sky visibility due to the operation of new single family
homes and street lights in the area. However, an exterior lighting plan, in
accordance with applicable Palm Springs City Zoning Ordinance Section
93.21.00, Outdoor Lighting Standards shall be submitted for review and approval
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 .h _
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-4212�, '
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT -*- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
by the City's Director of Planning Services and the Tribal Chief Planning Officer,
as appropriate, prior to the issuance of building permits. In addition,
manufacturer's cut sheets of all exterior lighting on the building and in the
landscaping shall also be submitted for approval prior to issuance of a building
permit. Compliance with the foregoing will limit light and glare, avoid any spill
over of light or glare onto surrounding properties, avoid creating intrusive light
and/or glare for vehicular traffic, and assist in maintaining right sky visibility.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
PD 5-1 The project includes landscaping enhancements within the project.
PD 5-2 The project includes a coordinated community theme for architecture and
landscape design.
PD 5-3 The project includes open public entries to encourage integration and
continuity with adjacent neighborhoods.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
SC 5-1 An exterior lighting plan in accordance with Zoning Ordinance Section
93.21.00, Outdoor Lighting Standards, shall be submitted for review and
approval by the Director of Planning Services prior to the issuance of
building permits. Manufacturer's cut sheets of all exterior lighting on the
buildings and in the landscaping shall be submitted for approval prior to
issuance of a building permit. If lights are proposed to be mounted on
buildings, down-lights shall be utilized.
MITIGATION MEASURES
After application of Project Design Features and Standard Conditions and
Requirements, no significant aesthetic impacts were identified; therefore, no additional
mitigation is required.
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Information in this section is derived from the following documents:
Landmark Consultants, Inc., Geotechnical Report Proposed Alexander Village, Palm Springs,
California, October,2004.
Landmark Consultants, Inc., Geotechnical Report Proposed Alexander Vista Estates, Palm
Springs, California, October, 2004.
't
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005' �
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-43
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
The above documents are available for public inspection during normal business hours
at the following locations:
City of Palm Springs Department of Planning and Building, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon
Way,Palm Springs, California 92263.
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Tribal Planning, Building & Engineering
Department,650 East Tahquitz Canyon Way,Palm Springs, California 92262.
Bureau of Indian Affairs Palm Springs Agency,901 East Tahquitz Canyon Way,Suite C-
101,Palm Springs, California 92263.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project site is located in the Coachella Valley portion of the Salton Trough
physiographic province. The Salton Trough is a geologic structural depression resulting
from large scale regional faulting. The trough is bounded on the northeast by the San
Andreas Fault and Chocolate Mountains and the southwest by the Peninsular Range
and faults of the San Jacinto Fault Zone. The Salton Trough represents the northward
extension of the Gulf of California, containing both marine and non-marine sediments
since the Miocene Epoch. Tectonic activity that formed the trough continues at a high a
rate as evidenced by deformed young sedimentary deposits and high levels of
seismicity. The surrounding regional geology includes the Peninsular Ranges (Santa
Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains) to the south and west, the Salton Basin to the
southeast, and the Transverse Ranges (Little San Bernardino and Orocopia Mountains)
to the north and east. Hundreds of feet to several thousand feet of Quaternary fluvial,
lacustrine, and Aeolian soil deposits underlay the Coachella Valley.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project may have a significant effect in relation to Geology and Soils if it will expose
people or occupied structures to geologic or soils hazards (including fault rupture,
ground shaking, liquefaction, subsidence, landslides, erosion, expansive soils) or
facilitate damage to, or the destruction of,unique geologic features.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving any of the following hazards:
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-44
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT -.*- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':'
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other Substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.
Less Than Significant Impact: The project site does not lie within a State
of California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Surface fault
rupture is considered to be unlikely at the project site because of the well-
delineated fault lines through the Coachella Valley as shown on USGS
and CDMG maps. For these reasons, project implementation will result
in less than significant impacts due to fault rupture and no mitigation is
required.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact: The nearest fault to the site is the San
Gorgonio-Banning Branch of the San Andreas Fault, located
approximately 3.5 miles to the north. Various other active faults or
seismic zones lie within 60 miles of the site. The project is located within
Seismic Zone 4, indicating that substantial ground shaking can be
expected at the project as is common, to varying degrees, in most of
Southern California. However, compliance with adopted building code
standards for Seismic Zone 4 will reduce the effects of ground shaking on
structures to acceptable levels. The proposed site structures should be
designed in accordance with the California Building Code for near source
factors derived from a "Design Basis Earthquake' (DBE). The DBE is
defined as the motion having a 10 percent probability of being exceeded
in 50 years. For these reasons, project implementation will result in less
than significant impacts due to seismic shaking and no mitigation is
required.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less Than Significant Impact: Liquefaction is the loss of soil strength
from sudden shock (usually earthquake shaking) causing the soil to
become a fluid mass. In general, for liquefaction to be manifested,
groundwater levels must be within 50 feet of the ground surface and the
soils within the saturated zone must also be susceptible to liquefaction.
The potential for liquefaction to occur at this site is negligible because the
depth of groundwater below the ground surface is located at a depth of
approximately 242 feet (Landmark Consultants, hic., October 2004). In
addition, the project does not lie within the Riverside County liquefaction
hazard zone. For these reasons, project implementation will result in less
than significant impacts relative to liquefaction and no mitigation is
required.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-45gt3 jR�T
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT '*-' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ❖
Jiv) Exposure of People or Structures to Landslides
Less Than Significant Impact: The hazard of landslides is unlikely due
to the regional planar topography. No ancient landslides are shown on
geologic maps of the region and no indications of landslides were
observed during the geotechnical site investigation. For these reasons,
project implementation will result in less than significant exposure to
landslides and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less Than Significant Impact: Construction of the project has the potential to
cause airborne and waterborne erosion during grading operations. These
impacts are managed by standard protocols in place at the City during review of
engineering design plans. The size of the project site will necessitate compliance
with NPDES criteria, preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP), and the inclusion of appropriate best management practices (BMPs) to
control soil erosion and off-site discharge of surface water pollutants during
construction and operation. The project will also be required to prepare a
Fugitive Dust (PM10) Mitigation Plan in compliance with adopted procedures of
the Air Quality Management District and the City of Palm Springs. Compliance
with these procedures will ensure that potential erosion is controlled during the
construction process. Paving of streets and planting of landscaping will stabilize
soils during the long term operational phase of the project (home occupancy).
For these reasons, project implementation will not result in substantial soil
erosion problems or the loss of top soil and no mitigation is required.
c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially result in on or off-site landslide,
lateral spreading subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
No Impact: The geotechnical report prepared for the project evaluated the
potential for landslide, liquefaction, and ground subsidence. In each case, it was
determined that the potential for these effects was low at this location.
Liquefaction potential is discussed above. Landslide potential is discussed
above. Regarding ground subsidence, the geotechnical report states that dry
sands tend to settle and densify when subjected to strong earth movement and,
therefore, the potential for ground subsidence on site is low. Further, it should
be noted that the project is located on similar soils and topography as adjacent
residential neighborhoods that have not exhibited signs of unstable soils. For
these reasons, project implementation will not create substantial risk to life or
property due to unstable soils and no mitigation is required.
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-46
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ';• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':•
No Impact: According to the Geotechnical Report the project site is classified to
be in the low expansion category in accordance with Table 18A-I-B of the
California (Uniform) Building Code. Consequently, project implementation will
not create substantial risk to life or property due to expansive soils and no
mitigation is required.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
waste water?
No Impact: The project proposes to dispose of wastewater by connection to the
Palm Springs City sewer system. The use of on-site wastewater disposal systems
is not proposed. For these reasons, project implementation will have no impact
on the suitability of the site for onsite wastewater disposal systems and no
mitigation is required.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
There are no special design features related to geology and soils.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
j SC 6-1 Design of structures shall conform to Uniform Building Code requirements
for Seismic Zone 4.
SC 6-2 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer shall prepare Stormwater
Pollution Prevention and Fugitive Dust Mitigation Plans, to be implemented
throughout all phases of construction.
SC 6-3 Building and grading plans shall be reviewed by a certified engineering
geologist to ensure that recommendations of the geotechnical report have
been properly implemented into the design.
SC 6-4 The grading contractor shall perform all grading activities in accordance
with the grading ordinance of the City of Palm Springs and
recommendations of the Geotechnical hivestigation.
SC 6-5 Observation and testing during site preparation, grading and placement of
fill materials shall be performed by a certified engineering geologist as
required by the CBC Sections 1701 and 3317.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-47 r"lr
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
':'
MITIGATION MEASURES
After implementation of Standard Conditions and Requirements, no significant impacts
related to geology and soils were identified; therefore, no additional mitigation is
required.
4.7 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Information in this section is derived from the following document:
The Keith Companies, Inc., Preliminary Hydrology Report, The Keith Companies, October 20,
2004, revised March 28,2005.
The above document is available for public inspection during normal business hours at
the following locations:
City of Palm Springs Department of Planning and Building, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon
Way,Palm Springs,California 92263.
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Tribal Planning, Building & Engineering
i Department, 650 East Tahquitz Canyon Way,Palm Springs, California 92262.
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Palm Springs Agency, 901 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite C-
101, Palm Springs, California 92263.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Coachella Valley groundwater basin is divided into five sub-basins. The project site
is located in the northwestern portion of the valley within the Palm Springs Sub-area of
the Indio Sub-basin. The predominance of usable groundwater has been developed
from the Indio Sub-basin which makes up about 400 square miles of the valley floor.
The groundwater is under confined or semi-confined conditions.
The major sources of recharge include infiltration of stream run-off from the San Jacinto
Mountains to the west, the Whitewater River, and subsurface in-flow from the San
Gorgonio Pass sub-basin located to the northwest. Percolation of rainfall to deeper
aquifers is considered negligible, as reported by the Department of Water Resources.
Groundwater movement is primarily from the recharge areas in the Palm Springs area
southeastward into the lower and upper aquifer of the Thermal Sub-area.
As mentioned previously in the Geology and Soils section of this report, depth of
Fr^�
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-48 1 F1
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
groundwater is located at a depth of approximately 242 feet below the ground surface
(Landmark Consultants,Inc.,October 2004).
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project may be deemed to have a significant effect on Hydrology and Water Quality if
it will significantly affect absorption rates, drainage patterns, the rate and amount of
surface runoff, the quality and/or quantity of surface or public water supply, the course
or direction of surface and/or groundwater movements or would expose people or
property to water-related hazards such as flooding.
Thresholds of significance with regard to water quality are typically interpreted in
relation to specific water quality standards of regional,state, and/or federal agencies.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project will connect to the City's
sanitary sewer system,which would convey wastewater generated by the project
to the Palm Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant. At the plant, wastewater is
processed to a tertiary level of treatment. According to the Palm Springs City
General Plan FIR, the wastewater treatment facility has a capacity of 10.9 million
gallons per day (mgd) and currently processes an average daily flow of 78.5
mgd. Since proposed project densities were anticipated in the 1993 update to the
City Sewer Master Plan, no expansion of the treatment plant would be necessary
to serve the project.
The Regional Water Quality Control Board regulates operation and any future
expansion of the facility. Compliance with existing National Pollution Discharge
Elimination Service (NPDES) regulations and discharge requirements of the
Regional Water Quality Control Board will ensure that potentially significant
impacts will be reduced to less than significant. Based upon these facts the
proposed project will not violate water quality standards or otherwise degrade
water quality. For these reasons, project implementation would not violate any
waste discharge requirement on a City, State, or Federal level and no mitigation
is required.
b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a
lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or
planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4490 r),r�17
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT '-*- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
Less Than Significant Impact: Project implementation would introduce
additional impervious surfaces (pavement, rooftops) on the site and result in
consumption of additional water supplies for residential use (drinking water and
landscape irrigation). The City of Palm Springs General Plan estimates that a
typical single family residence utilizes approximately 602 gallons per day (gpd)
of water for all uses. Based upon this consumption factor, the proposed project
would use approximately 71,036, gpd of water. This level of usage will not
significantly affect the groundwater basin on a project level.
Assuming 100% coverage of the project area (worse case scenario 35.86 acres)
with impervious surfaces, the project would only cover a small fraction of the
total groundwater basin. There are no wells proposed by the project and no
wells located in the project vicinity, therefore the project would not have an
affect on local well levels.
It should be noted that the Whitewater River groundwater sub-basin is currently
in an overdraft condition. Therefore, Desert Water Agency (DWA) would be
contributing cumulatively to this overdraft condition by supplying water to any
new project in the Coachella Valley, including this one. To address this situation
and stabilize long-term ground water levels, DWA has instituted ongoing
programs including artificial recharge of the groundwater basin using State
Water Project supplies and other surplus water, orderly expansion of the
recycled water system and aggressive investment in and promotion of
conservation programs. These programs (including water purchases) are funded
by a groundwater assessment fee charged against groundwater well extractions.
Due to its large size, basin management is feasible with replenishment using
surplus water during wet years and draw down during dry ones.
The project would follow water conservation guidelines included within the
Palm Springs General Plan Update FIR (Page 5-100) and the Palm Springs
General Plan (Pages 1I-63 and H-64) and the Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance to mitigate the impacts to public water supplies. These would include
the use of drought tolerant plants in landscaping and efficient irrigation systems.
For these reasons, project implementation would not substantially deplete
groundwater supplies, interfere with groundwater recharge, or lower local
groundwater table levels beyond that needed to support existing land uses on
either a project or cumulative level and no mitigation is required. As infill
development,water resources have been considered in the City's General Plan.
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project will alter the topography of the entire
site, including existing drainage conditions, via grading operations to create
streets and building pads. Therefore, erosion and siltation are potential impacts
of the project. As discussed in a) above, compliance with mandatory NPDES
f
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-50 ��
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS-*.*
requirements and BMPs will reduce the potential of erosion and siltation during
short term construction and long term operational phases of the project. The
final residential project will stabilize soils on-site through the use of landscaping,
appropriate ground covers and control storm water via grading design, street
drainage systems, catch and retention facilities. By protecting the soil and
controlling storm water, soils on the site will not be exposed to water borne
erosion.
Although the project would alter the existing drainage pattern on site, self-
mitigating features in the form of properly designed grading,street drainage and
retention facilities (subject to review and approval by the City of Palm Springs
under standard conditions of approval) have been incorporated into the project
and no additional mitigation is anticipated to be necessary.
d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on-or off site?
Less Than Significant Impact:
Off-Site Flows
The sites of the proposed projects receive surface runoff from areas to the north
and northwest. These areas comprise approximately 149-acres separated into
two distinct basins: Basin A consisting of the area encompassing the Palm
Springs Country Club and Golf Course to the north, and Basin B consisting of the
area along Verona Road northwest of the project sites. The golf course portion of
the Palm Springs Country Club contributes approximately 76 cfs, and the
residential portion of the Palm Springs Country Club and surrounding areas
contribute approximately 116 cfs to the intersection of Verona Road and
Whitewater Club Drive. Due to existing street conditions, approximately 68.08
cfs is directed easterly along Verona Road to the northwest corner of Alexander
Vista Estates, and the remaining 47.92 cfs is directed southerly within
Whitewater Club Drive.
The 68.08 cfs from Verona Road and the 76 cfs from the golf course represent the
offsite drainage that will be passed through Alexander Vista Estates and
Alexander Village without retention. This flow (144.08 cfs) will be conveyed via
storm drain piping (60-inch pipe) to the historic release point in the southeast
corner of Alexander Village (inlets in Via Escuela). A "bubbler" system will
direct overflows into the onsite retention pond located nearby.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-51
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
On-Site Flows
Alexander Vista Estates and Alexander Village will utilize a common retention
pond sized to accommodate both projects and an area immediately north of
Alexander Vista Estates. The total acreage comprising the proposed projects and
the area immediately to the north is approximately 41 acres resulting in a
retention pond requirement of approximately 66,665 c.f. for the 100-year
incremental event. This pond will be located in the southeast corner of
Alexander Village near Via Escuela and Gene Autry, Tribal property. The pond
will be sized with a maximum depth of 5-feet and maximum side slopes of 3:1.
Street runoff from onsite development will be conveyed overland within the
street sections until street capacity is reached. Storm drain inlets and storm drain
piping will convey the runoff exceeding the street capacity into the retention
pond. Location of the inlets and storm drain piping will be determined during
final design of the projects. Preliminary calculations indicate that the street
section within Alexander Vista Estates has the capacity to convey storm runoff
without the need for storm drain piping, however, the street runoff will be
conveyed via storm drain piping (18" diameter) from the southerly boundary of
Alexander Vista Estates through the street sections proposed in Alexander
Village to the retention pond.
Preliminary calculations also indicate that an 18-inch pipe will have adequate
capacity for this runoff.All pad elevations have been established above the flood
elevations calculated to be generated by the design storm.
Summary
The storm drain system for Alexander Vista Estates and Alexander Village has
been designed to comply with all pertinent City of Palm Springs Retention and
Detention Basin policies. Alexander Vista Estates has been designed to pass the
100-year offsite flows (144.08 cfs) through the site via storm drain piping, while
retaining the onsite incremental flows for the 100-year event within a retention
pond located in Alexander Village. Emergency overflow for the retention pond
will be directed (via landscaped swale) to existing inlets in Via Escuela. These
inlets are located in a sump condition and represent the point of historic release.
The emergency overflow has been designed with rock slope protection from the
high water overflow point to the point of continual grade of the swale. Based on
the foregoing, no significant hydrology and water quality impacts are anticipated
and no mitigation measures are required.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-52 �� �.
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
e) Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
Less Than Significant Impact: No permanent or intermittent streams or rivers
occur within the project site boundaries. The incremental increase in site storm
drainage from project implementation is being addressed through the placement
of a retention basin as discussed above. The potential for polluted runoff has
been addressed by the project as discussed in this report, under Section 4.7(a).
above. By incorporating retention facilities and complying with mandatory
regulations, the project will not exceed the capacity of an existing or planned
storm drain system or generate additional sources of polluted runoff and no
additional mitigation is required.
) Would the project in any other way substantially degrade water quality?
Less Than Significant Impact: As discussed in this report, under Section 4.7(a).
above, impacts to water quality as a result of project implementation are
considered less than significant and no additional mitigation is required.
g) Would the project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project area lies in Zone B of the
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 060257 0004 D, Map Revised: July 7,
1999, for Riverside County, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA). Zone B represents areas between limits of the 100-year flood
and 500-year flood; or certain areas subject to 100-year flooding with average
depths less than one (1) foot or where the contributing drainage area is less than
one square mile;or areas protected by levees from the base flood.
As discussed in this report, under Section 4.7(d) above, the proposed project has
been designed to provide water retention for the incremental site development
for the "worst case" 100-year flood event. In addition, the project site is
protected by the Whitewater River Channel to the north. Therefore, the project
will not place housing in a flood hazard risk area and no additional mitigation is
required.
h) Would the project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact: Major flood flows which would impact the project have already
been redirected via the Whitewater River Channel, just north, and intersecting
the northern boundary of the project site. State drainage law requires that the
( } project not increase or concentrate flows to downstream properties and the
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-53 t? r�
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
project includes detention facilities subject to standard City Engineering
protocols to accomplish this as discussed previously in this report, under Section
8d, above. For these reasons, project implementation would not place housing
within any other 100-year flood plain that would impede or redirect flood flows
and no mitigation is required.
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Less Than Significant Impact: The Whitewater River Channel is located just
north, and intersecting with the northern boundary of the project site. The Palm
Springs General Plan stated that: The Whitewater River does not pose a threat to
life or property within the Palm Springs area, given a flooding situation
approaching the intermediate regional stage. However, given a more serious
combination of hydrologic events as in an "approximate" standard project flood
(associated with the 100 year storm), the existing levees could be breached and
certain developed areas in the north end of Palm Springs would be threatened.
Although the Whitewater River does not prove a significant hazard to safety in
the City as a whole, it would threaten transportation and communication to the
City in a high-water stage. Three major transportation links into the City,
namely the Southern Pacific Rail Line, State Route 111 and I-10 are subject to
closure and subsequent damage given a flood situation. In an emergency
situation, disruption of circulation would seriously jeopardize public safety.
However, the City of Palm Springs has adopted a Master Drainage Plan and
policies within the General Plan to mitigate flood hazards within the City.
Compliance with the City's flood damage prevention ordinance is designed to
protect health, safety and property, public facilities and utilities, assure the most
efficient use of flood control monies, ensure owner awareness of special flood
hazards and promote appropriate development controls in hazardous areas
(Palm Springs General Plan Page III-5). For these reasons, project implementation
would not place people/structures in the path of a flood due to structural failure
of a dam or levee and no mitigation is required.
j) Cause inundation by seiehe, tsunami, or mudflow?
Less Than Significant Impact: No large water body or reservoir exists upstream
of the proposed project and the project lies inland from the ocean. Therefore,
conditions are not present that would pose a hazard from seiehe, tsunami or
mudflow to people or structures on site. Conversely, the project does not
propose to construct any new reservoirs that would pose a risk of flooding or
mudflow to any downstream properties in the event of a structural failure. For
these reasons, project implementation would not expose people or structures to
hazard from seiehe, tsunami or mudflow and no mitigation is required.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-54 i.
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4-
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
PD 7-1 Alexander Vista Estates and Alexander Village will utilize a common
retention pond sized to accommodate both projects and an area immediately
north of Alexander Vista Estates.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
SC 7-1 Prior to final map approval,the developer shall submit engineering plans for
approval by the City Engineer demonstrating the acceptance and
conveyance of storm water runoff to protect on-site and downstream
properties from the 100-year storm event.
SC 7-2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall submit evidence
to the City Engineer that the applicant has obtained coverage under the
NPDES statewide General Construction Activity Storm water Permit from
the State Water Resources Control Board.
SC 7-3 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit an
application for Final Landscape Document Package to the Director of
Planning Services for review and approval. Refer to Chapter 8.60 of the
Palm Springs Municipal Code for specific requirements.
MITIGATION MEASURES
After application of Project Design Features and Standard Conditions and
Requirements, no significant impacts to hydrology and water quality were identified;
therefore,no additional mitigation is required.
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Information in this section is derived from the following document:
Earth Systems Southwest, Report of Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Update on
Approximately 35-Acres of Undeveloped Land, APNS 677-030-001, -032, -033 And -019, Gene
Autry Trail At Whitewater River Channel, Palm Springs, California, November 9, 2004.
The above document is available for public inspection during normal business hours at
the following locations:
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-55 fps"�DI
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS**-*
City of Palm Springs Department of Planning and Building, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon
Way, Palm Springs, California 92263.
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Tribal Planning, Building & Engineering
Department, 650 East Tahquitz Canyon Way,Palm Springs, California 92262.
Bureau of Indian Affairs Palm Springs Agency, 901 East Tahquitz Canyon Way,Suite C-
101,Palm Springs,California 92263.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Update was prepared in accordance with
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard E-1527-00, Standard
Practice for Environmental Site Assessments. The report was prepared as an update to a
prior Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), prepared by Earth Systems Southwest in
June,2002, and includes APN 677-030-019,which was not a part of the prior ESA.
The purpose of the report was to evaluate the potential for presence of soil or
groundwater contamination as a result of past use, storage, handling or disposal of
hazardous materials or petroleum products on or near the subject property. The scope
} of work for this evaluation included a reconnaissance of the site and its vicinity, a
review of the prior ESA report and a review of information obtained from regulatory
agencies regarding the use, storage, generation, or release of hazardous materials on the
site or in the site vicinity.
Historic Maps and Aerial Photos: A study of historic aerial photos and maps indicated that
until 1998 the site was a former dry wash terrain that remained undeveloped other than
informal dirt trails that tended to follow dry wash features. The project vicinity
currently consists of a mix of undeveloped land, residential areas, a golf course/country
club, commercial properties and the White Water River Channel.
Environmental Record Research: A report summarizing the information available from
regulatory agencies regarding sites that generate, store, use and or have released
hazardous materials was obtained from Track Info Services LLC (aka: Environmental
FirstSearch) a firm specializing in maintaining a database of this information. Review of
the FirstSearch report identified that five facilities presented potential concerns to the
subject site.
A total of 16 database record finds were identified within the search 1-mile radii. A
review of these properties found that 10 of the properties were within one mile of the
subject property, however, six were not actually within the search radii. Two of the
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-56 ' '
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTALANALYSIS 4'
properties were listed in multiple databases. All of the properties revealed in the search
are summarized in Table 4-15 (Record Search Findings For 1 Mile Radius of the Project Site):
TABLE 4-15
RECORD SEARCH FINDINGSFOR • OF •
PROPERTY ' TO LISTING COMMENTS
PROJECT
The Desert Sun .75 miles south • Resource Conservation& Business generates a No problems
Recovery Act Generator small quantity of ever
(RCCAGEN)Database hazardous waste. reported.
Hertz Equipment .25 miles • Resource Conservation& Business generates a No problems
Rental southeast Recovery Act Generator small quantity of ever
(RCCAGEN)Database hazardous waste. reported.
Sossa's Market .24 miles • Riverside County Underground Gas No problems
#4 southwest Underground Storage Tanks On-Site ever
Tank(UST)Database reported.
GTE Palm Springs less than 1/8 mile • Riverside County Underground Fuel Case Closed
Plant Yard southeast Underground Storage Storage Tank Onsite. in 1994.
Tank(UST)Database
• Leaking Underground Petroleum leak
Storage Tank(LUST) detected.
Database
i � • Facility Index Systems File shows a letter of
--- (FIDS)Database closure,dated 6/2/94
Palm Springs .02 miles west. • Riverside County Underground Fuel Case Closed
Country Club Underground Storage Storage Tank Onsite. in 1992.
Tank(UST)Database
• State UST Database 1995 spill of 740 gallons
• Leaking Underground of an unidentified
Storage Tank(LUST) chemical during a fire at
Database a chemical building.
• Emergency Response
Notification System Spill reportedly
(ERNS)Database contained,cleaned up&
transported to a
Hazardous Waste
Storage Facility.
Letter of closure on file,
dated July 10,1992
Source: Earth Systems Southwest, Report of Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Update on Approximately 35-
A cres of Undeveloped Land, APNS 677-030-001, -032, -033 And-019, Gene Autry Trail At Mutewater River Channel,
Palm Springs, California,November 9,2004.
Agency Review: Earth Systems contacted the Riverside County Department of
Environmental Health for information concerning known releases at the site or in the
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-57 �� r f,�
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •:' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4.e
vicinity. Linda Shurlow, the department manager overseeing cleanup of hazardous
materials releases, indicated that she was not aware of any environmental problems at
the site or likely to affect the site.
Site Reconnaissance: The project site was observed to consist of moderately vegetated
native desert with wash features oriented northwest to southwest. Vegetation showed
no visible signs of distress. Dirt trails ran along the site boundaries and crisscrossed the
site in all directions, often following the wash features. Some of the off road vehicle
tracks were fresh and continued off-site. Since the previous EAS, additional illegal
dumping was evident on the site. Debris included yard clippings, golf balls, demolition
debris, household trash, trailer and car parts, furniture and scrap metal. A larger
concentration of debris was found in an area northwest of the subject property.
The prior ESA found evidence of liquid waste northwest of the project site, but the stain
was not observed in the November 5, 2004 survey. Evidence of what appeared to have
resulted from water runoff from East Verona Road, which terminates in a dead-end
northwest of the subject property, was observed as a wet patch of soil just northwest of
the property. No odor was noted in association with the runoff. A locked chain link
fence had recently been installed, limiting access to the site from that location, but
boundaries on the north, east and south are not secured and evidence of vehicle access
onto the site from those directions was noted.
A 10 foot high storm water levy is located along the northern edge of the property. This
levy separates the property from the White Water River Channel. Just west of Gene
Autry Trail, the levy jogs south, onto the subject property,before intersecting with Gene
Autry Trail. Approximately 1 foot of standing water, resulting from recent rain was
found on this portion of the site between the levy and Gene Autry Trail. No direct
evidence of significant environmental concerns was observed on the subject property or
off-site in the vicinity of the property. The two sites reporting hazardous materials spills
in the past did not appear to warrant a threat to the subject property, based on their
status and distance from the project site. Based on these findings, Earth Systems
determined that no further investigation of the site was warranted.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project may cause significant Hazards and Hazardous Materials impacts if it will
create a potential public health hazard or involve the use, production or disposal of
materials which pose a hazard to people or animal or plant populations in the area
affected; or,interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-58 ,
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ':' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':'
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less Than Significant Impact: As a residential development, the proposed
project would not contain any facilities or elements involving the routine
transport, use or disposal of significant amounts of hazardous materials. Any
hazardous materials that would be used or stored on site during the proposed
future use of the site (e.g. gasoline for lawnmowers, pesticides and weed killers,
lawn fertilizers, cleaning supplies, paints, solvents, etc.) would be for household
use only. The quantities kept in a residential setting would not be considered
significant enough to pose a hazard to the general public. As a consequence, no
hazard to either the general public or onsite residents is anticipated in this regard
and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact: The Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Update,
prepared by Earth Systems Inc., verified that there were no hazardous materials
on the property and found yard waste, construction debris, and household
debris scattered across the site, adjacent to dirt trails that crisscross the site.
Hazardous materials were not observed in the debris. As indicated earlier, the
prior ESA found evidence of liquid waste northwest of the project site.However,
the stain was not observed in the November 5, 2004 survey. As a consequence,
further investigations regarding these materials do not appear warranted.
Residential uses do not inherently create hazardous conditions. Any hazardous
materials on site (e.g. gasoline for lawnmowers,pesticides and weed killers, lawn
fertilizers) would be for household use. The quantities kept in a residential
setting would be too small to pose a hazard to the general public. For these
reasons, the project will create no significant hazard related to the use, upset or
release of hazardous materials and no mitigation is required.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle acutely hazardous materials,
substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact: There are no existing or proposed schools within one-quarter mile of
the project site and there are no emissions or handling of acutely hazardous
materials, substances or wastes associated with the standard activities of
residential developments. For these reasons, the project does not pose a hazard
to nearby schools and no mitigation is required.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-59 fe13
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ':•
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials
sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact: The project sites are not listed in any of the databases maintained in
accordance with Government Code Section 65962.5. Further, the aforementioned
Phase 1. Environmental Assessment verified there were no indications of
hazardous materials on the property. Given the foregoing, no further
investigation of the site is warranted in this regard and no mitigation is required.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the public area?
Less Than Significant Impact: Palm Springs International Airport is located
approximately 1 mile south of the project site. Although, the project falls within
Zone D of the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the
Palm Springs International Airport, the project is consistent with Section 3.3.1
because development of the subject property would be considered infill
development. In addition, the project would result in less than 100 people per
acre at build-out which is well below the target density for Zone D. For this
reason, the project in not expected to result in the exposure of residents to safety
hazards from public airport flights or operations and no mitigation is required.
f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact: The proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a private
airstrip.
g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact: Both projects will be reviewed by the City Fire
Department per standard City procedure to ensure consistency with emergency
response and evacuation needs. Access has been incorporated into the project
design to facilitate emergency response. For these reasons, the project would not
impair or interfere with an emergency response plan and no additional
mitigation is required.
h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas.or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
'1
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-60 ��j S q/j
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSTS
Less Than Significant Impact: The Fire Department's ability to service the
project area is relatively adequate since the property is adjacent to existing roads
and has readily available access. Given that the proposed project would provide
internal streets in an area that is now primarily dry creosote scrub brush and
low, dry vegetation, the project would improve access to the property and omit
the threat of wildland fires. The project would provide vehicular access to each
residential lot in accordance with PSFD guidelines.
When completed, a portion of the project may lie outside the Fire Department's
5-minute response area. City protocol requires all projects to undergo review by
the Palm Springs Fire Department(PSFD). Any structures which are determined
to lie outside this area would be required to have building sprinklers per Palm
Springs Municipal Code, Section 11.02.020. Development of the project in
accordance with fire department requirements (hydrant locations, fire flow
volume, fire resistant construction, emergency access, vegetation management,
etc.) would ensure that the potential hazard from wildland fires would be less
than significant.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
PD 8-1 The project provides emergency vehicle access per PSFD guidelines.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
4 �
SC 8-1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall submit building
plans for review and approval by the Palm Springs Fire Department that
incorporate design techniques, including any necessary building sprinklers in
accordance with the requirements of Section 11.02.020 of the Municipal Code.
MITIGATION MEASURES
After application of Project Design Features and Standard Conditions and
Requirements, no significant impacts due to hazards and hazardous materials were
identified;therefore,no additional mitigation is required.
4.9 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Police Protection: The site of the proposed project is provided law enforcement and
police protection services by the City of Palm Springs Police Department from its station
at 200 South Civic Drive. The station is located about 1.5 miles south of the project area
and meets the 5 minute response time to this area.
r�
f
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-61 ��
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT e++ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ❖
The Palm Springs Police Department operates a community policing policy, based on a
partnership between citizens and the police officers. Palm Springs is divided into three
areas; each area has one commander, three sergeants, approximately fourteen police
officers, and three community services officers assigned. The Police Department,
commanders, sergeants, officers and community services officers meet regularly with
concerned citizens, civic groups, business owners, senior citizens and other groups to
work toward maintaining a safe and peaceful community. The proposed project is
located in the district patrolled by the Departments' Divisions 3 and 4; ("Blue Team")
which patrol the Northeast and Downtown areas of the City. In addition to their patrol
responsibilities,each of the officers, supervisors and support personnel are committed to
problem solving within their district through working with the community.
Fire ProtectionlParamedic Services: Fire protection and paramedic services are provided to
the project area by the Palm Springs Fire Department. Fire stations in Palm Springs
were built using an Emergency Master Plan designed to ensure a response time of five
minutes or less to emergencies in their respective primary response areas. The project
site is within the primary response service area of Station No. 443, located at 590 E.
Racquet Club Drive, which is approximately 1.5 miles east of the project site. Station
No. 443 houses one fire engine, one quick attack truck, one "telesquirt" engine, and a
"Jaws of Life" unit. Backup fire and emergency response services are provided by Fire
1 Department Station No. 441 and other departments in the area, if necessary. The Fire
Department also contracts with American Medical Response for ambulatory services.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project may significantly impact Public Health and Safety Services if it requires an
alteration or expansion of such facilities.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the
public services.
a) Police protection?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: The ,project
proposes to construct new residential structures, which would increase the
demand for law enforcement services in the area. Law enforcement services
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-Q T
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ':' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ':'
would be provided by the Palm Springs Police Department (PSPD). The PSPD is
headquartered at 200 South Civic Drive. According to the Police Department's
web site, current police staffing consists of 92 sworn personnel and 56 classified
personnel. This results in a staffing/population ratio of 1:500. According the
General Plan EIR, 1.5 officers per 1000 population (1.5:1000) is a sufficient ratio.
At build-out a resident population of 295 persons (based on 2.52 persons per
single family household per General Plan Land Use Density/intensity Table, GP
page I-26) will generate the need for less than 1 police officer (.44 per 295
population). The Palm Springs Police Department also has a mutual aid
agreement with the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. Funding for the
Police Department comes from the City's General Fund. This, along with other
projects presently being built in Palm Springs, will bring added residents to the
community resulting in an increased demand for police protection. In order to
address this increased demand, the City intends to form an Assessment District
to provide additional funding to the police department.
The project would be developed in accordance with Section II (Building Security
Regulations) of Chapter 8.04 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. Prior to
approval of tentative tract snap entitlements, the project will be reviewed by the
PSPD and conditioned for necessary law enforcement requirements. Therefore,
standard City protocols for tentative map review and the imposition of
reasonable conditions of approval would ensure that project implementation
would result in a less than significant impact on law enforcement services.
b) Fire protection?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project proposes to construct new residential
structures, which would increase the demand for fire protection services in the
area. Fire protection would be provided by the Palm Springs Fire Department
(PSFD) from station #443 (one of five City fire stations) located at 590 East
Racquet Club Drive. The PSFD has set a maximum acceptable fire response time
of five minutes and all structures beyond this primary response area are required
by City ordinance (City Municipal Code Section 11.02.020) to install automatic
fire sprinklers and other built-in fire protection equipment, as deemed
appropriate by the Fire Department. However, the proposed projects fall within
the five-minute response boundary for station #443. As such, project
implementation will not require sprinklers compliance with the aforementioned
ordinance. It is noted that anticipated growth in the Palm Springs area will bring
added residents to the community resulting in an increased cumulative demand
for fire protection services. In order to address this increased demand, the City
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-63
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS•S
intends to form an Assessment District to provide additional funding to the fire
department.
Prior to approval of tentative tract map entitlements,the project will be reviewed
by the PSFD and conditioned for necessary fire protection requirements (hydrant
locations, fire flow volume, fire resistant construction, primary and secondary
access, fire sprinklers, vegetation management, etc.) Therefore, standard City
protocols for tentative map review and the imposition of reasonable conditions
of approval would ensure that project implementation would result in a less than
significant impact on fire protection services.
c) Other Public Facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact: Development of the project will result in an
increased use of public facilities including roads, utilities, schools, parks,
libraries, police and fire protection services. However, the ongoing maintenance
of these facilities is funded through the collection of taxes and other funding
sources to maintain City facilities in acceptable condition. The project applicant
shall be required to pay for the construction of internal roadways proposed at the
site. The maintenance of these roadways will be the responsibility of the project
Homeowners Association once the build out is completed. Therefore,the project
will not result in an unusually heavy burden on the maintenance of public
facilities. For the reasons stated above, project implementation would result in
no significant impacts to public services and no additional mitigation is required.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
PD 9-1 Automatic fire sprinklers will be installed in all structures beyond the PSFD
maximum acceptable response time of five minutes.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
SC 9-1 Prior to approval of tentative tract map entitlements, the project will be
reviewed by the PSFD and conditioned for necessary fire protection
requirements (hydrant locations, fire flow volume, fire resistant
construction, primary and secondary access, fire sprinklers, vegetation
management,etc.)
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-64 �s �?
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4-
MITIGATION MEASURES
After application of Project Design Features and Standard Conditions and
Requirements, no significant impacts to public health and safety were identified;
therefore,no additional mitigation is required.
4.10 RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The are approximately 152 acres of City-owned recreational facilities and developed
parkland within the City of Palm Springs, or approximately 2.86 acres of developed
recreational area per 1,000 population; somewhat below the national standard (3 acres
per 1,000 residents). To increase the amount of recreational space the City of Palm
Springs adopted an Ordinance (No. 1632) requiring residential development projects to
dedicate land for recreational use or pay in-lieu fees,based on a ratio of 5 acres for every
1,000 new residents.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project may have a significant effect on Recreation if it increases demand for
neighborhood parks, regional parks, or other recreational facilities; or affects existing
recreational opportunities. The criteria for determining the adequate ratio of
recreational land is 5 acres per 1,000 residents.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
Less Than Significant Impact: Development of the project would result in an
increased demand for park and recreation facilities. The City of Palm Springs
Parks and Recreation Department is responsible for park facilities within the City
and indicates that the City maintains a 5:1 standard ratio of park area acreage to
one thousand population. The project will be required to dedicate land (1.48
acresl or contribute in-lieu fees for the provision of park facilities at the required
ratio. For these reasons, project implementation will result in no significant
impacts to park facilities and no additional mitigation is required.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-65y
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
Less Than Significant Impact: Construction of recreational facilities that are
planned for the proposed projects would not have an adverse affect on the
environment.
PROTECT DESIGN FEATURES
The proposed projects include an improved active open space area within the Alexander Village
retention basin.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
SC 10-1 Pursuant to Park Fee Ordinance No. 1632 and in accordance with Government
Code Section 66477 (Quimby Act), all residential development shall be
required to contribute to mitigate park and recreation impacts such that,prior
to issuance of residential building permits, a parkland fee or dedication shall
be made. Accordingly, all residential development shall be subject to
parkland dedication requirements and/or park improvement fees. The
parkland mitigation amount shall be based upon the cost to acquire and fully
improve parkland.
MITIGATION MEASURES
j
After application of Project Design Features and Standard Conditions and
Requirements, no significant impacts to recreation were identified; therefore, no
additional mitigation is required.
4.11 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Information in this section is derived from the following document:
Eilar Associates, Revised Biological Assessment for APN 677-030-001, 677-030-019, and 677-
030-032 Palm Springs, California,June 6,2005 (by Debra Kinsinger,Biological Consultant)
The above document is provided herein in its entirety as Appendix A.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The site of the proposed project is on the valley floor of the Coachella Valley and was
part of the Whitewater River floodplain prior to the building of a containment levee
bordering the eastside of the project site. The site is nearly level with a gradient of less
than one percent from the project's northwest corner to southeast corner. As indicated .
i
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-66
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
previously in this document, the site of the proposed project is located on a part of the
Agua Caliente Indian Reservation, within Section 6, Township 4 South, Range 5 East,
San Bernardino Base and Meridian. This places the project within the boundaries of the
Final Draft Tribal Habitat Conservation Plan (THCP) for the Agua Caliente Band of
Cahuilla Indians (THCP, 2002),as shown in Figure 12 (Project Area Biological Attributes).
A biological field survey was undertaken on October 26, 2004. Preparation for,the field
survey involved using lists of sensitive flora and fauna published in the THCP and also
utilized GIS data published on the Coachella Valley Association of Governments
(CVAG) Draft Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) web site that
models core habitat, predicted habitat and potential habitat (CVAG 2004). Vegetation
communities were described, according to the Holland classification system (1986) and
the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB 2003). The THCP identifies habit of
the site as "ephemeral sand fields" corresponding to the habitat type listed in the CVAG
data tables for sensitive species that have the potential to occur on the site (THCP 2002,
CVAG 2004). While the site may have at one time been properly characterized as an
ephemeral sand field, the White Water River Levee and surrounding urban
development have altered the character of the site so that it no longer functions as an
ephemeral sand field. The site no longer receives sand input and loss from strong winds
and has become static. As a result, various sensitive species that may have had a high
potential to occur there, now have only a low or moderate potential. Plants now
thriving in the area are more characteristic of the Sonoran creosote bush scrub habitat
type. Habitats of this type are called ecotones, due to the blend of characteristics from
one or more habitat types.
The site of the proposed project is comprised entirely of Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub,
the most widespread vegetation type in the Coachella Valley. Sonoran Creosote Bush
Scrub is also a wildlife habitat type that the THCP indicates as supporting a wide range
of sensitive species that include: Peninsular bighorn sheep, Palm Springs ground
squirrel, Palm Springs pocket mouse, desert tortoise, burrowing owl, Coachella giant
sand treader cricket, Coachella Valley grasshopper, Coachella Valley milkvetch, triple
ribbed milkvetch, Mecca aster and Orocopia sage. None of these species were observed,
nor have a moderate or greater potential to occur, on-site. The White Water River levee
and tamarisk trees that border it for much of its length effectively prevent sand transport
systems from contributing blowing sand from the river bed or alluvial sand to the
project site, thus altering the character of the site to another wildlife habitat type referred
to as "Stabilized and Partly Stabilized Desert Sand Field". Sensitive species within this
wildlife habitat type include: Palm Springs ground squirrel,Palm Springs pocket mouse,
flat-tailed horned lizard, Le Conte's thrasher, burrowing owl, Coachella Valley
Jerusalem cricket, Coachella Valley grasshopper, and Coachella Valley milkvetch. None
of these species were observed,nor have a moderate or higher potential to occur, on-site.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-67 .
LEGEND
PROJECT BOUNDARY A APN 677-030-001
ba
TOPO CONTOURS B APN 677-030-032
DIRT TRAILS C APN 677-030-019
THCP BOUNDARY SA... HABITAT TYPE '3
;f
ti �,_ 64
�niu 2: p 1 L21c n
7tiJV' r �J Ort)) F
i
1 � O
rlyc
-1
D
J v
".�1 n_ `� ��r' e"lL�s�� i�l�d'��'�' �i`�'LI'ict� Ci'•d .
a ; Ulf? 0 Cf[ 'r "I In ' L a'/inl
��
J n)
, v
' f F
]} • „ 6' A ,
M 5 `
F
t
k
rf
is FA W,AIr
All of the habitat within and around the project boundary is creosote bush scrub on stabilized and partially stabilized desert sand
fields,except for the developed areas west of Whitewater Club Road and South of Via Escuela Road
PROJECT AREA BIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES
MAP
NOT TO SCALE
Figure 12
x
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
The diversity and types of species observed during the field survey offers a good
indication of the potential of the site to support other species often found in association
with those observed. A complete list of flora and fauna observed on the project site can
be viewed in Appendix A.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project has a significant effect on Biological Resources if it will result in a loss of
individuals, populations, or habitat of a federal or state designated threatened,
endangered, or rare species; a loss of locally designated species, such as heritage trees; a
loss of locally designated natural communities, such as vernal pools; a loss of wetland
habitat;or an interference with wildlife dispersal or migration corridors.
Project actions are also evaluated in terms of impacts to species that do not fall into one
of the above categories, but which nevertheless are protected by federal or state
regulations. Most often such cases involve nests of birds such as red-tailed hawks that
are not rare, but are still protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the
California Department of Fish and Game Code.
The term "rare' species is usually interpreted to mean species that are on lists prepared
by federal, state, or private organizations but are of lower sensitivity status than
threatened or endangered species. Thus, the term "rare" refers to species listed by the
California Native Plant Society, federal/state Species of Special Concern, or species
considered sensitive by a local jurisdiction.
Evaluation of significance is typically different between threatened/endangered species
as compared to non-listed or rare species. Any loss of threatened or endangered species
or their habitat is considered a significant impact in relation to federal and state
endangered species regulations. However, thresholds of significance for loss of rare
species have not been codified in federal or state regulations. Generally, the term is
interpreted in terms of whether the project action would jeopardize the continued
persistence or viability of individuals or populations of the species in question.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species
in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Wildlife Service?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Of the 28
sensitive species that were considered in the biological assessment, only two
t
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-69 ��
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT :' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':'
species have a potential to occur on the project site, the Coachella Valley Flat-
Tailed Horned Lizard, a State species of Special Concern and the Chapparal sand
verbena. Six species have a low to moderate potential to occur on the project site
or within the 100 foot mapping extension: the federally threatened and state
endangered Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed Lizard and five state Species of Special
Concern; Slender Wooly Heads, Palm Springs Pocket Mouse, Palm Springs
Ground Squirrel,Black-Tailed Gnatcatcher and Casey's June Beetle.
Direct and/or indirect impacts to the federally endangered species will be "less
than significant" by assuming presence and mitigating for "take" by purchasing
mitigation credit through a fee process through the Agua Caliente Band of
Cahuilla Indians, as USFWS Section 10 (a) permittee as provided for by the
Fringe-Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan (USFWS 1985). Direct and
indirect impacts to federal and/or state species of special concern and sensitive
habitats will be "less than significant" by assuming presence and mitigating for
"take"under the existing MOU for the Fringe-Toed Lizard.
Alternately, direct and indirect impacts to federally threatened, state
endangered, or federal or state Species of Special Concern will be avoided by
conducting focused surveys for these species in spring and determining presence
or absence. A survey determining presence would still require mitigation to
reduce impacts below the significance threshold.
J) Cumulative impacts will be less than significant as long as habitat loss mitigation
is within a ratio appropriate for loss of fringe-toed lizard habitat and sympatric
species. Cumulative impacts to other non-sympatric Species of Special Concern
with a potential to occur on the project site will be compensated by habitat loss
mitigation so as not to exceed cumulative thresholds for habitat loss as
established through the DFG, USFW, CVAG and the guidelines within the
THCP.
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or
by the California Department of Fish (CDFG) and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service(USFWS)?
Less Than Significant Impact: Although the property is recognized as having
high potential and suitable habitat for the Flat-tailed horned lizards and
Chapparral sand verbena the property is not identified as a sensitive natural
community and it contains no riparian habitat. The property is a stabilized
shielded sand field, which has been impacted by surrounding development, off-
road vehicle use, illegal dumping, and cut off from the naturally occurring wind
blown sand migration by development to the northwest, construction of the
levee and planting of tamarisk trees along much of the length next to the
Whitewater River. For these reasons, project implementation will have ono
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-70
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ❖
adverse effect on a riparian habitat or sensitive natural community and no
mitigation is required.
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or
other means?
Less Than Significant Impact: There are no wetlands, marshes or water ways
on the subject properties. The White Water River Channel is separated from the
property by an approximately 15 foot high containment levee that bisects the
corner of parcel 677-030-032, therefore no direct or indirect impacts to the levee
or White Water River flood plain will occur as a result of the proposed project.
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
No Impact: The subject property is a stabilized, shielded sand field, bounded by
off-site urban development on all sides; single family residential communities to
the south and west, a flood control levy to the north and Gene Autry Trail to the
east, essentially cutting it off from any other habitat areas. There are no
migratory corridors on the property and the proposed development will not
impact any native wildlife nursery sites.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated• Please see Item
4.11 (a) above.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat
conservation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact: The Tribal Habitat Conservation Plan specifies
regulations and policies for how development'will occur on lands of the Agua
Caliente Indian Reservation. The subject property is identified, under the Plan,
as being designated for single family residential development, therefore the
proposed project would not conflict with the Plan.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
PD 11-1 The project shall prevent access to open water sources that would attract
sensitive species.
{/l11
rL
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-71 ��
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
SC 11-1 Follow the THCP adjacency guidelines (Section 4.9.5.1) to avoid direct
impacts,night lighting,excessive noise,invasive species and domestic use.
MITIGATION MEASURES
MM 11-1 Pay the $800 per acre mitigation fee to the Tribe for 36 acres of habitat that
will be impacted by the project that may be occupied by the federally
endangered fringe-toed lizard and other species of concern including: the
flat-tailed horned lizard, Palm Springs ground squirrel, Palm Springs pocket
mouse; species of concern that have a lower likelihood of onsite occurrence,
including burrowing owl and black tailed gnatcatcher and CNPS-sensitive
chaparral sand verbena that does occur on the site and slender wooly heads,
if it occurs there now or may in the future.
MM 11-2 Conduct pre-construction surveys for burrowing owls within 48 hours of
construction and have a qualified archaeologist remove them, if found, and
collapse burrows to prevent re-occupation.
MM 11-3 Conduct pre-construction live trapping for burrowing mammals 48 hours in
advance of grading to remove burrowing animals that may otherwise be
entombed and to obtain better data on potentially occurring species.
MM 11-4 Refrain from storing soils or building materials onsite in an unconfined
manner that would attract burrowing species. Stored soil shall be covered
and weighted to prevent wildlife intrusion. Spoils from development shall
be removed to prevent potential attraction of sensitive species.
After application of Project Design Features, Standard Conditions and Requirements,
and Mitigation Measures outlined above, impacts on biological resources were
determined to be mitigated to a level of less than significant.
4.12 CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
Information in this section is derived from the following document
The Keith Companies, Inc., Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation For 11.35 Acres Within
Section 6, Township 4 South, Range 4 East, Agua Caliente Indian Reservation, City of Palm
Springs, Riverside County, California (TTM 30350),January, 2005.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-72„
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL AN4LYSI5":•
The Keith Companies, Inc., Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation For 23 Acres Within
Section 6, Township 4 South, Range 4 East, Agua Caliente Indian Reservation, City of Palm
Springs, Riverside County, California(Including Allotment 1i60E),January,2005.
The above documents are provided herein as Appendix B.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Archival research, records checks and tribal scoping indicates that the project sites are
located within a general area of moderate sensitivity for both prehistoric and historic
resources. However past flooding and channel changes of the Whitewater River have
likely reduced the potential for finding surface indicators of older cultural resources. In
addition, impacts to the parcel from previous utility improvement installations, storm
water levy, off-road vehicles, refuse dumping, neighborhood youth play activities,
homeless persons' encampments, and historic flooding events have likely obliterated or
buried any visible evidence of cultural resources along the wash.
A review of historic maps indicates that Section 6 was not inhabited by Euroamerican
development until the middle of the 201h century,when a small residential subdivision is
indicated on the south side of Via Escuela, on the 1957 USGS map. In earlier prehistoric
times various temporary camps and larger settlements were situated within close
proximity to the subject property, including the ethno-historic village of Sehi or Sec he
(Palm Springs), located approximately 1 mile to the southwest, and village sites within
Chino Canyon to the west. Hunting and gathering practices occurred on the valley floor
as well as in the mountain and canyon areas, and trails led from villages to these areas,
to water sources and to other villages throughout the Coachella Valley and to other
regions. Cahuilla ethnography remembers a well traveled Indian trail which led from
the village of Sehi to a village near present day Desert Hot Springs that may have been
in close alignment to what became the Gene Autry/Palm Drive Road alignment.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project may significantly impact Cultural Resources if it disrupts or adversely affects a
prehistoric or historic archaeological site or a property of historic significance to a
community, ethnic or social group, or a paleontological site except as part of a scientific
study.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical
resource as defined in 15064.5?
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-73
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT V ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':'
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: A records search,
research into local/regional historic mapping and an intensive ground field
survey were performed to identify any historic and archaeological resources that
might be present on the project site. The records search indicated that the project
site had not been surveyed for cultural resources prior to this study and, only
one archeological site had been recorded within a one-mile study radius. No
artifacts, features, buildings, structures, or other cultural resources were found
on the subject property during the field study. No federal, state, or tribally
defined historic resources were identified on the property. However, both TKC,
Inc. and the Tribal Historic Preservation Office of the Agua Caliente Band of
Cahuilla Indians recommend that during earth-moving activities the property
should be monitored for cultural resources. The monitoring program shall be
coordinated between the grading contractor, Tribal Resources Coordinator and
the project archaeologist. Prescribed mitigation will lessen the potential impact
to subsurface historic resources to less than significant.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: No prehistoric or
historic cultural resources were found on the property during the intensive
pedestrian survey. Because cultural heritage resources were not found on the
1
subject property, and there have been such resources recorded in the vicinity of
the subject property, it is reasonable to assume that the proposed project would
not impact any known cultural resource. However, subsurface cultural deposits
may be present as a result of past Whitewater River flood deposits, gathering or
hunting practices or nearby prehistoric trail use. TKC, Inc. recommends that the
Agency Official may determine in accordance with §800.4 (a)-(c) that there are
no historic properties that may be affected by the undertaking, however
archaeological monitoring of earth-disturbing activities by a qualified
archaeologist and Tribe appointed monitor in compliance with Tribal request
would mitigate the affect to less than significant. The monitoring program shall
be coordinated between the grading contractor, Tribal Resources Coordinator
and the project archaeologist.
c) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site
or unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project does not contain any unique geologic
features and the proposed project is located in an area with low to moderate
potential for paleontological resources. For these reasons, project
implementation will have less than significant impacts on unique geologic
features and paleontological resources.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-74
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT ':' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':'
d) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: As discussed in
Topic 4.12 (a) above, no evidence of burial sites were identified during record
researches or field surveys of the site. Although no burial sites were identified,
due to the project's location in proximity to other known sites, and the fact that
buried resources are often obscured and not easily recognizable on the surface,
archeological monitoring is recommended, with a focus on any subsurface
deposits. Adherence to prescribed mitigation measures (below) will assure that
impacts to potential subsurface human remains are less than significant.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
There are no special project design features related to cultural and historic services.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
SC 12-1 In the unlikely event that human remains are encountered during the
project, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further
disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary
findings as to origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98. The following actions must be taken
immediately upon the discovery of human remains:
(1) Stop immediately and contact the County Coroner;
(2) The Coroner has 2 working days to examine human remains after being
notified by the responsible person. If remains are determined to be
Native American, the Coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American
Heritage Commission;
(3) The Native American Heritage Commission will immediately notify the
person it believes to be the most likely descendant of the deceased Native
American;
(4) The most likely descendant has 24 hours to make recommendations to the
owner, or representative, for the treatment or disposition, with proper
dignity of the human remains and grave goods;
(5) If the descendant does not make recommendations within 24 hours, the
owner shall re-inter the remains in an area of the property secure from
further disturbance, or; if the owner does not accept the descendant's
recommendations, the owner or the descendant may request mediation
by the Native American Heritage Commission.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-75
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4-
MITIGATION MEASURES
MM 12-1 Archaeological monitoring of earth-disturbing activities by a qualified
archaeologist and tribal appointed monitor in compliance with the Tribal
Historic Preservation Office.
MM 12-2 In the event that cultural resources are located during grading activities on
the 23 acres of tribal land, construction must be halted in the vicinity of the
fund and the BIA Regional Archaeologist and project archaeologist shall be
notified. If cultural resources are located during grading activities on the 11
acres of non-reservation (fee land) construction activities must be halted in
the vicinity of the find and the project archaeologist shall be notified. Work
should not proceed in the area of the find, but rather be redirected, if
possible, until a qualified archaeologist has been consulted to determine the
significance of the find. The City of Palm Springs General Plan Historic
Element Policy 5b/16 includes the requirement"...if archaeological resources
are uncovered during grading for any project within the planning area, the
building contractor shall stop grading immediately. The contractor shall
notify the City and shall summon a qualified archaeologist to determine the
significance of uncovered resources and specify appropriate mitigation."
After application of Project Design Features, Standard Conditions and Requirements,
and Mitigation Measures outlined above, impacts on cultural and historic resources
were determined to be mitigated to a level of less than significant.
4.13 PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Water.
Water service for the proposed project would be provided by the Desert Water Agency
(DWA). DWA currently serves a 325 square-mile area which includes all of Palm
Springs, some adjacent County areas and parts of Cathedral City. The agency obtains
approximately 5% of its drinking water supply from mountain stream sources that
include Chino Creek, Chino Creek, Snow Creek and Falls Creek. The remaining 95% is
groundwater pumped from deep wells. Natural groundwater replenishment is
supplemented with Colorado River water imported through the Colorado River
Aqueduct to recharge basins located near Windy Point, northwest of the proposed
project. DWA also strives to implement and encourage various water conservation
measures to ensure a safe, lasting supply of water to accommodate existing and future
water demands.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-76 ��
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT S' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':'
Wastewater:
Wastewater disposal services in Palm Springs are provided by the City of Palm Springs
Municipal Water Service. An 8-inch sewer main will be constructed within the project
and within Via Escuela east to Gene Autry Trail, then south to an existing 18-inch trunk
line in Vista Chino. Said 18-inch trunk line in Vista Chino terminates south of the
project site at the City's wastewater treatment plant at 4375 Mesquite Way, The subject
plant has a capacity of treating 10.9 million gallons of sewage per day (MGD). Present
demand for wastewater treatment at this facility currently stands at approximately 7.5
MGD. (Doug Lore,Palm Springs Waste Water Treatment Plant,2005).
Electricity:
The subject site is supplied electricity by Southern California Edison. Additional lines
and equipment would be needed to service the project site. "Excluding any unforeseen
problems, plans for new distribution resources indicate that Southern California
Edison's ability to serve all customers loads will be adequate during the decade of the
2000's" (Bobby Gray, Customer Service Planner, Southern California Edison, 2005).
Natural Gas:
Natural gas proposed to serve the project would be provided by the Southern California
Gas Company. Gas service to the project would be obtained from a 3-inch main located
in Verona Road. Natural gas would then be extended from this connection point to each
lot via the interior street system. (Rogelio A. Rawlins, Technical Services Supervisor, The Gas
Company,2005).
Telephone and Cable Television:
Telephone and cable television services are provided to the project area by Verizon
(formerly General Telephone) and Time Warner Cable (TWC),respectively.
Schools:
The project site is within the service area of the Palm Springs Unified School District.
Children in the area of the proposed project attend Vista Del Monte Elementary School,
Raymond Cree Middle School, and Palm Springs High School. District enrollment is
presently nearing maximum capacity in many of the schools, particularly those in areas
where recent development has occurred. In the near future the District plans to request
raising development fees in hopes to better facilitate the projected increase in students,
but at this time required development fees are paid to the school district, pursuant to
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
"CKC 40778.05 Page 4-77 f.
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT �- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS•:+
requirements of SB50 in the amount of $2.24 per square foot of development. (Ivan
Dailey, Palm Springs Unified School District,July,2005)
Library Facilities:
The project area is served by the Palm Springs Public Library, located at 300 South
Sunrise Way, approximately 2.5 miles southwest of the project site and by the Cathedral
City Public Library, approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the project site. Maintenance
for both libraries is funded through grants and appropriation of local tax dollars,
collected through the each of the respective cities.
Public Transit:
The site of the proposed project is provided public transit services by the SunLine
Transit Agency. The "Sunbus" Routes 14 and 31 have stops on both Vista Chino Road
and Gene Autry Trail in the vicinity of the project site. Route 14 travels back and forth
from Palm Springs to Desert Hot Springs and Route 31 travels between Palm Springs,
Cathedral City and Thousand Palms. Other Sunbus routes in the Coachella Valley are
available to travelers along both Route 14 and 31.
Solid Waste Disposal:
Trash and recyclable waste collection is provided to the project site by Palm Springs
Waste Disposal Service (PSDS). Curb-side pick-ups are scheduled twice per week. Solid
waste collected from the project area would be sent to the Edom Hill recycling transfer
station located in the City of Cathedral City. The Edom Hill transfer station is an 8-acre
facility operated by Waste Management Inc. with a permitted throughput of 2,600 tons
per day. The transfer station has been operating since the recent closure of the Edom
Hill Landfill. Solid waste sent to the transfer station will be transported to various
landfills, all of which have capacity to accommodate waste from the project.
The Lamb Canyon Landfill is located at 16411 State Highway 79 in Beaumont. The
landfill is sited on 353 acres, of which 145 acres are currently being used for disposal.
The landfill was permitted for expansion on December 16, 2003 and currently has a
remaining capacity of 25,967,000 cubic yards, which is projected to accommodate solid
waste demand until the projected closure date of January 1, 2023 based on a permitted
throughput of 3,000 tons per day.
The Badlands Landfill is located at 31125 Ironwood Avenue in Moreno Valley. The
landfill is sited on 1,093 acres, of which 150 acres are currently being used for disposal.
The landfill was permitted for expansion on July 30, 2001 and currently has a remaining
,Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-78 ��
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
capacity of 15,036,809 cubic yards, which is projected to accommodate solid waste
demand until the projected closure date of January 1, 2018, based on a permitted
throughput of 4,000 tons per day.
The El Sobrante Landfill is located at 10910 Dawson Canyon Road in Corona. The
landfill is sited on 1,322 acres, of which 495 acres are currently being used for disposal.
The landfill was permitted for expansion on June 6, 2001, and currently has a remaining
capacity of 184,930,000 cubic yards, which is projected to accommodate solid waste
demand until the projected closure date of January 1, 2020, based on a permitted
throughput of 10,000 tons per day. (Sungkey Ma, Planner, Riverside County Waste
Management Department, December, 2004)
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project may significantly impact Public Services if it requires an alteration or
expansion of such facilities.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB)?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would be served by the
Palm Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant. Based on the number of residences
the project is expected to generate approximately 38,330 gallons of waste water
per day (130 gallons per day per resident, Palm Springs General Plan). This
amount constitutes an approximate 0.51% increase in the 7.5 million gallons of
wastewater now being treated at the plant and would decrease the remaining
capacity of the plant by approximately 1.13%. Operation of the Palm Springs
Wastewater Treatment Plant is regulated by the Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB) and standard permitting and monitoring protocols ensure that
treatment requirements for waste discharges are not exceeded. For these
reasons, project implementation would not exceed RWQCB wastewater
treatment requirements and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is consistent with the,'
density provisions of the City's Wastewater Master Plan, that has been designed
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-79
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
to a accommodate General Plan build out projections. The project would
increase the demand for water treatment by approximately 031%, reducing
remaining capacity of the plant from 3.40 MGD to just over 3.36 MGD. The
General Plan EIR states that implementation of the General Plan, including land
uses proposed on this site,will not have a significant effect upon the City's sewer
system. For these reasons, project implementation would not require the
expansion or new construction of wastewater treatment facilities nor would it
result in a determination of inadequate capacity to serve the project or the
community and no mitigation beyond Standard Conditions & Regulations is
required.
The Desert Water Agency (DWA) currently owns, operates, and maintains
domestic water distribution and pumping facilities within the project area. The
City of Palm Springs General Plan estimates that a typical single family residence
utilizes approximately 602 gallons per day (GPD) of water for all uses. Based
upon this consumption factor, the proposed project would use approximately
70,434 GPD. This level of usage will not significantly affect the groundwater
basin on a project level. Project proponents will be required to connect to
existing DWA water infrastructure to provide water to the site for construction
and domestic water service. Water service requirements may include, but are
1 not limited to, upgrades, modifications, replacement, and abandonment of
existing DWA facilities. These improvements may require construction within
and adjacent to public rights-of-way and exiting and/or proposed easements.
The developer will be required to comply with all rules, regulations, and other
requirements of the DWA in order to provide water service to the site.
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the Coachella
Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) provide growth assumptions that
have been used to forecast DWA's future water demands. Future density and
water demands of development in DWA's service area were accounted for in the
Coachella Valley Water Management Plan and in the Urban Water Management
Plan. The project is consistent with future growth projections. For these reasons
the project will not cause significant environmental impacts.
c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Less Than Significant Impact: As previously described in Section 4.7 of this
document, the storm drain systems for Alexander Vista Estates and Alexander
Village were designed to comply with all pertinent City of Palm Springs
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-80
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT -*.- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Retention and Detention Basin policies. Alexander Vista Estates has been
designed to pass the 100-year offsite flows (144.08 cfs) through the site via storm
drain piping, while retaining the onsite incremental flows for the 100-year event
within a retention pond located in the southeast comer of the Alexander Village
portion of the proposed project. Emergency overflow for the retention pond will
be directed (via landscaped swale) to existing inlets in Via Escuela. These inlets
are located in a sump condition and represent the point of historic release. Catch
basins will be sized using FHWA Chart 11-Grate Inlet Capacity in Sump
Conditions. Catch basins have been per County of Riverside Standard 300.
Storm drain pipes will be sized utilizing "StormCad" software and shall be
Advanced Drainage System N-12 storm drain pipe (or an approved equal). For
these reasons, it is anticipated that the project will not have a significant impact
on existing flood control facilities.
d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Less Than Significant Impact: The Desert Water Agency (DWA) has
responsibility for water service to the project site. The project proposes 8-inch
water lines within private streets to deliver water to the homes on site. Public
utility easements would be granted over water lines within the project to provide
_. DWA with access and maintenance rights over their lines. Water for the
proposed project would be provided via connection to existing DWA water lines
in Via Escuela and Whitewater Club Drive.
DWA water supply is obtained from groundwater wells, with supplemental
water from the Metropolitan Water District's Colorado River Aqueduct. The
proposed project would generate a demand of approximately 25 million gallons
of water annually (assuming 602 gallons/household/day, per the Palm Springs
General Plan). DWA has indicated that it has sufficient water supply to serve the
project,therefore, the project would not significantly affect the provision of water
service by DWA within its jurisdiction.
DWA has noted that the Whitewater River groundwater sub-basin is currently in
an overdraft condition. Due to its large size, basin management is possible with
replenishment using surplus water during wet years and draw down during dry
ones. Long-term ground water levels are being stabilized by actions including
the practice of artificial recharge of State Water Project supplies and other
surplus water, orderly expansion of the recycled water system and aggressive
investment in and promotion of conservation programs. Based on its on-going
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-81
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT -.• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS �:•
management plans, the DWA has determined that there is sufficient water
supply for the project.
To minimize water consumption, the project will follow water conservation
guidelines included within the Palm Springs General Plan Update EIR (Page 5-
100), the Palm Springs General Plan (Pages U-63 and 11-64), and the City's Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance to mitigate the impacts to public water supplies.
These would include the use of drought tolerant plants in landscaping.
For these reasons, the project has sufficient water supply from existing
entitlements and resources procured by the DWA such that impacts to water
supply would be less than significant and no additional mitigation is required.
e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
Less Than Significant Impact: Wastewater treatment service to the project
would be provided by the Palm Springs Waste Water Treatment Plant. The
project is anticipated to generate 38,330 GPD of waste water, causing an increase
in waste water treated at the plant by less than 1/2 of 1% and apportion
approximately 1.13% of the plant's current treatment capacity, leaving an
adjusted future capacity of the treatment plant still well above 3.3 million GPD.
The project is consistent with the density provisions of the City's Wastewater
Master Plan, which was designed to accommodate General Plan build out
projections. The General Plan EIR states that implementation of the General
Plan, including land uses and density proposed on this site, will not have a
significant effect upon the City's sewer project and the existing community,
therefore the project will not exceed the treatment planfs capacity to serve
existing or projected demand on waste water treatment service.
f) Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would generate
approximately 2,950 pounds per day of solid waste (assumes ten
pounds/person/day), which is negligible compared to the combined capacity of
the various landfills serving the site via the Edom Hill Transfer Station. For these
reasons, the project will be served by landfills with sufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs and no additional
mitigation is required.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-82,1 q �-
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT B• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS :•
g) Would the project comply with federal,state, and local statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
Less Than Significant Impact: State Assembly Bill 939 mandates that
municipalities must work to reduce the amount of trash sent to the landfills. The
City of Palm Springs has policies in their General Plan to address this mandate.
The City has been working diligently with Palm Springs Disposal Service to offer
many recycling and waste diversion programs to residences and businesses in
the Palm Springs area that reduce the amount of trash taken to landfills.
Recycling bins are provided to residents free of charge. Residents are asked to
separate their recyclables from other non-recyclable waste and to take household
hazardous materials to the Palm Springs ABOP collection center. Special
collection events and workshops are frequently scheduled, to teach and provide
residents the opportunity to recycle and reduce solid waste.
The proposed project will be consistent with local policies regulating solid waste
management. Solid waste from the project would be generated by single family
residences for curbside pickup and be subject to the collection requirements of
Palm Springs Disposal, that precludes the disposal of hazardous substances to
the landfill. For these reasons, project implementation will comply with federal,
state and local solid waste regulations and no additional mitigation is required.
h) Would the project have an adverse impact on any other public utilities or services,
include the following;
Electricity?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is estimated to create a
demand of approximately 3,500 kilowatts hours per year (based on rate of 11.877
kilowatt hours/person/year). Electrical service to facilitate the proposed project
area would be provided by Southern California Edison, via underground electric
lines along the north side of Villa Escuela. Extensions to existing electrical lines
would be necessary to facilitate the proposed project. Southern California
Edison has plans to expand their services to support future development in the
area and has accounted for future growth projected by Southern California
Association of Governments, therefore no significant impacts to Electrical
Services, resulting from the proposed project are anticipated. (David Quesado,
Southern California Edison,2005)
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-83
INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ':• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS•:'
Library?
Less Than Significant Impact: There are two libraries located within 3.5 miles of
the project site. Both are funded by grants and taxes appropriated through their
respective cities. Thus,no impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required.
Natural Gas?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would result in a demand
of 93,483 therms of natural gas per year (based on a generation factor of 799
therms/unit/year). The Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas
to facilitate utilities improvements within the proposed easements though an
existing three (3) inch gas line along Verona Street. Extensions to existing gas
lines would be needed to facilitate the proposed development project. Southern
California Gas Company will provide the necessary lines and has planned to
provide services to accommodate future development, according to growth rates
provided by the Southern California Association of Governments. Therefore no
significant impacts to natural gas services are anticipated. (Rogelio A. Rawlins,
Technical Services Supervisor, The Gas Company, 2005).
Public Transportation?
Less Than Significant Impact: Please refer to discussion in Section 4.2.g herein.
Schools?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would generate
approximately 59 new school-aged residents (based on a student generation
factor of .5 per du). Students would attend schools within the Palm Springs
Unified School District; Vista Del Monte Elementary, Raymond Cree Middle
School, and Palm Springs High School. This impact requires the applicant to pay
development fees to the Palm Springs Unified School District (pursuant to the
requirements established in SB50). Implementation of this standard condition/
requirement will ensure consistency with the City of Palm Springs General Plan
and school district policies. (Ivan Dailey,Facilities Manager, PSUSD,July 1,2005)
Telephone and Cable Television?
Less Than Significant Impact: Verizon provides telephone and fiber optic
underground service to facilitate the Palm Springs area. Extensions to existing
telephone and fiber optic lines would be needed to facilitate the proposed
(�1
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-84 r�j�
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖
development project. These services would be coordinated with Verizon and the
project developers. As a result, no significant impacts to telephone
communication services are anticipated (Justin Cashmere, Verizon,January, 2005).
Cable Television, digital phone and internet services are provided by Time
Warner Cable Co. for most of the Coachella Valley. Extensions to existing lines
would be needed to facilitate the proposed development project. These services
would be coordinated with Time Warner and the project developers. As a result,
no significant impacts to cable television services are anticipated and no
mitigation is required.
PROTECT DESIGN FEATURES
There are no special project design features related to public utilities and services.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
SC 13-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall pay to the
Palm Springs Unified School District, School Development Fees in the
amount of($2.24/sq ft. residential).
MITIGATION MEASURES
After application of Standard Conditions and Requirements, no significant impacts to
public utilities and services were identified; therefore, no additional mitigation is
required.
4.14 SOCIOECONOMICS/POPULATION AND HOUSING
Information for this section was taken in part from the following technical reports:
State of California, Department of Finance, E-1 City/County Population Estimates, with
Annual Percent Change,January 1, 2003 and 2004. Sacramento, California, May 2004.
State of California, Department of Finance, Population Projections by Race/Ethnicity for
California and Its Counties 2000-2050, Sacramento, California,May 2004
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Population: Based on the latest State of California Department of Finance estimates, the,
population of the City of Palm Springs was -44,250 as of January 1, 2004. The SLAG
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-85
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS •S
population projection estimates a population of-51,514 in Palm Springs by the year 2010
(12%increase,6,181 additional residents).
Socioeconomics: The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and BIA policy guidelines
provide for the need to develop economic independence for the tribe and its individual
members. The emphasis is on making Indian trust lands productive and diversifying
the economic base to benefit the Tribe. Improvements have been made affecting
substantial localized spending for goods and services, construction employment and
ultimately operational employment, all positive economic indicators favorably
integrated into the local economy.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A project may be deemed to have a significant effect on Population and Housing if it
will induce substantial growth or concentration of population, or, displace a large
number of people.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less Than Significant Impact: The Alexander Village portion of the proposed
project is anticipated to house approximately 197 residents (based on 2.52
persons per single family household per General Plan Land Use
Density/intensity Table, GP page I-26). This number represents approximately
3%of the total projected increase in population.
The Alexander Vista Estates portion of the proposed project is anticipated to
house approximately 98 residents (based on 2.52 persons per single family
household per General Plan Land Use Density/intensity Table, GP page I-26).
This number represents approximately 1.6% of the total projected population
increase.
Together the total combined project would generate approximately 295 new
residents in the City of Palm Springs, representing approximately 4.8% of the
total projected population increase.
Although new housing is proposed, site development at residential densities of
six units per acre and resident population of 295 persons (based on 2.52 persons
per household for L6 designation per General Plan Land Use Density/Intensity
Table, GP page I-26) was anticipated by the City's General Plan and does not
--, constitute population growth beyond what has been planned. For the reasons
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-86,, �,�
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':'
stated above, the project does not serve to induce either direct or indirect
population growth and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact: The sites of the proposed projects are vacant and absent any
residential uses. Consequently, project implementation would not displace any
existing houses.
c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction
of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact: Please see Item 4.13 (b) above.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
There are no special project design features related to socioeconomics/population and
housing.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
There are no Standard Conditions or Requirements related to socioeconomics/
l
population and housing.
MITIGATION MEASURES
No significant impacts to socioeconomics/population and housing were identified;
therefore no mitigation is required.
4.15 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
The following discussion is in part excerpted from "A Guide to the LAFCO Process For
Incorporations, Appendix D, Civil Rights and Environmental Justice Issues", California
Governor's Office of Planning and Research, October 2003.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
To date, no environmental justice issues pertaining to the subject property have been
raised from any faction.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-87
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS•:'
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The Constitutional basis for environmental justice lies in the Equal Protection Clause of
the U.S. Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment expressly provides that the states
may not"deny to any person within [their]jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws'
(U.S. Constitution, amend. XIV, §1). In 1992, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(U.S. EPA) published a report indicating that "racial minority and low-income
populations experience higher than average exposures to selected air pollutants,
hazardous waste facilities, and other forms of environmental pollution." The foregoing
prompted President Clinton to sign Executive Order (E.O.) 12898 titled "Federal Actions
to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations" in 1994. E.O. 12898 directed federal agencies to incorporate environmental
justice into their missions. In an accompanying memorandum, President Clinton
underscored existing federal laws that could be used to further environmental justice,
including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the National Environmental Policy
Act(NEPA) of 1969.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The proposed project will facilitate the ultimate on-site development of for-sale single
family residential dwelling units. In that no environmental justice issues have arisen to
date in the project area or specific to the project site itself, and since all sales of homes on
the project site shall be subject to the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing
Act (FEHA) (GC § 129.00et seq.) and California State Planning and Zoning Law (GC §
65008), no environmental justice issues are anticipated to be associated with the
proposed project.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
There are no special project design features related to environmental justice.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS
There are no Standard Conditions or Requirements related to environmental justice.
MITIGATION MEASURES
No significant impacts related to environmental justice were identified; therefore no
mitigation is required.
r�}
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-88, �,,
INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT '; ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':•
4.16 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare, or endangered plant
or animal to eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: As discussed in previous
Sections 4.11, Biological Resources, and 4.12, Cultural and Historic Resources, all
project-related impacts on biological, cultural and/or historic resources can be
reduced to less than significant levels.
b) Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an
individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: As indicated previously
in Section 4.2 the proposed project is expected to contribute to significant
cumulative impacts upon traffic circulation. However, said significant impacts
are mitigated to Less Than Significant levels through the application of
prescribed mitigation measures.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: This document has
analyzed the impacts of the proposed projects on the environment and human
beings and has concluded that development of the projects as currently proposed
would not result in any significant direct or indirect impacts on human beings.
Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005
TKC 40778.05 Page 4-89 ,