Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-04-05 STAFF REPORTS 1C ;O pALMS'0P ry Ri N e + �RIOPI.ilO 30 + cA`'F°"NAP CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: April 5, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: CONTEMPO HOMES — ALEXANDER VILLAGE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33623, SUBDIVIDING AN APPROXIMATELY 3.42-ACRE PARCEL INTO TEN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, LOCATED NORTH OF VIA ESCUELA AND WEST OF GENE AUTRY TRAIL FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager BY: Department of Planning Services SUMMARY The City Council will consider a proposed subdivision of an 3.42-acre parcel into ten single-family residential lots, ranging in size between 9,754 and 19,841 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 33623, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 3.42-ACRE PARCEL INTO 10 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VIA ESCUELA AND WEST OF GENE AUTRY TRAIL, ZONED 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. 1 . n . City Council Staff Report April 5,2006 -- Page 2 TTM 33623 STAFF ANALYSIS: The proposed project is a Tentative Tract Map subdividing an approximately 3.42-acre parcel into ten 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. In 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 9,754 and 19,841 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 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: IFinance Director Review: No fiscal impact. C,aa'rn<' wng, AICP Thomas Wilso , Assistant City Manager Director-of PlanningSe ices David H. Ready, City Manager, s� 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 "'` Department of Planning Services w E E ;,, Vicinity Map S VE VE R `r V H Q NORLOTI ST Q w z w U U � Q � d w w Q Legend RIM Site [=50T Radius VISTA CHI N — CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE: NO: Tentative Tract Map 33623 DESCRIPTION: An application by Contempo Homes to subdivide an approximate 3.42 acre parcel into 10 single-family residential lots ranging from 7,500 to APPLICANT: Contempo Homes 10,000 square feet located north of Via Escuela and west of Gene Autry Trail, Zoned R-1-D, Section 6. APN: 677-030-019. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33623, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 3.42-ACRE PARCEL INTO 10 SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VIA ESCUELA AND WEST OF GENE AUTRY TRAIL, ZONED 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 33623 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 33623 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. E 00�Dj 4� 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 Council's 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 10 lots on an approximately 3.42-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 single-family residence 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 5 dwelling units per acre and a maximum of six dwelling units per acre. The proposed density of approximately 3 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. l)Cj,° 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 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 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. Section 3: The City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map 33623, and directs staff to file the associated Notice of Determination. Section 4.: The City Council approves Tentative Tract Map 33623. ADOPTED THIS 5th day of April, 2006. David H. Ready, City Manager ATTEST: James Thompson, City Clerk i, 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 1st 2006, by the fallowing vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: James Thompson, City Clerk City of Palm Springs, California (. OUQ EXHIBIT A CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33623 (Contempo Homes) APN: 677-030-019 April 5, 2006 North of Via Escuela and West of Gene Autry Trail 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 Tentative Tract Map 33623. 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. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 2 3. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks, 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. 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. 5. 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. Environmental Assessment 6. 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 ouu -n Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 3 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. 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. E 0r II Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 4 • Monitor for particulate emissins according to SCAQMD District-specified procedures. Contract the District for more information at 714-396-3600. C. To mitigate for PMto 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 PM16 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 dailytraffic 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) 1. Stabilize backfill material during handling and at completion of activity. 2. Pre-water soils prior to cut and fill activities. 3. Stabilize wind erodible surfaces to reduce dust. 4. Stabilize surface soils where support equipment and vehicles will operate. 5. Stabilize disturbed soils throughout the construction site. 6. 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. 7. Maintain at least six feet of freeboard on haul vehicles„ 8. Stabilize stockpiled soils. 9. Limit vehicular travel to established unpaved roads (haul routes) and unpaved parking lots. conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 5 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 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) u '., Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 6 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) 7. The developer shall reimburse the City forthe 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. CC&R's 8. 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. 9. 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. conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Paige 7 Public Safety CFD 10. 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 underthe 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 Resources —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. 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 The Engineering Division recommends that if this application is approved, such approval is subject to the following conditions being completed in compliance with City standards and ordinances. Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 8 LEGAL ACCESS 1. If not already obtained, the applicant shall be required to obtain a public right-of-way "without limitation as to tenure" across the property identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032, as necessary to provide public access from Via Escuela to the subject property, as required by the City Engineer. The public right-of-way 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. 2. The applicant shall be responsible for compliance with all Bureau of Indian Affairs (B.LA.) requirements, including payment of any BIA fees, obtaining appraisals and payment of just compensation to the underlying owner associated with acquisition of the public right-of-way 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. 3. If not already constructed by others, the applicant shall construct a minimum 36 feet wide public street, with 6 inch curb and gutter constructed 18 feet from centerline in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200, with a minimum pavement section of 2'h inches asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal. The public street shall extend from Via Escuela to the subject property, as required by the City Engineer. 4. Upon completion of the public street across the property identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-032, and as a condition of acceptance of the public street by the City Engineer, the applicant shall prepare forthe 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. STREETS 5. Any improvements within the public right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs Encroachment Permit. 6. Submit street improvement plans prepared by a registered California civil engineer to the Engineering Division. The plan(s) shall be approved bythe City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 9 7. When public dedications of easements or rights-of-way over Tribal Allottee land are required, 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. It is the applicant's responsibility to determine what additional costs or other requirements maybe necessaryto obtain any required public dedications as identified bythe City for this development. Required public dedications for easements or rights-of-way are "without limitation as to tenure'; easements granted with a defined term, or made in connection with an underlying Indian Land Lease, shall not be accepted. 8. Upon completion of required improvements by the applicant, and as a condition of acceptance bythe City Engineer, the applicant shall prepare forthe City Engineer's approval an Affidavit of Completion in accordance with Section 169.16, Title 25, of the Code of Federal Regulations, for any 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 bythe City Engineer prior to final acceptance of the project, including issuance of a final certificate of occupancy. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary form forthe Affidavit of Completion from the Palm Springs Agency of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and for having it completed as necessary bythe applicant's Engineer of Record. HELENE'S TRAIL (PUBLIC STREET) 9. Upon a finding bythe Planning Commission that there is no significant impact to the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the proposed neighborhood, in accordance with General Plan Policy 7.1.6, a reduced right-of-way width of 40 feet may be approved. The applicant shall dedicate a right-of-way of 40 feet across the proposed public street. 10. Dedicate right-of-way for the cul-de-sac in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 101, modified with R1=25 feet and R2=45 feet. 11. Dedicate an easement 3 feet wide adjacent to proposed public right-of-way for sidewalk purposes. 12. Dedicate an easement 7 feet wide along the back of all driveway approaches for sidewalk purposes. 13. Construct 6 inch curb and gutter, 18 feet from centerline along both sides of centerline; and construct a 6 inch curb and gutter throughout the cul-de-sac in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 101, modified with R=27 feet, and City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200. yl Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 10 14. Construct driveway approaches in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201. 15. Construct a 5 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the frontage of the public street in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. 113. Construct a minimum pavement section of 2'/2 inches asphalt over4 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, between the proposed gutters on both sides of the street 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. SANITARY SEWER 17. All sanitary facilities shall be connected to the public sewer system. New laterals shall not be connected at manholes. 113. 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. 19. Construct an 8 inch V.C.P. sewer main across the public street frontage 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 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. 21). 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 bythe Bureau of Indian Affairs and recorded with the Riverside County Recorder prior to approval of a final map or issuance of a grading permit. 21. 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. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 11 22. 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 forthe 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. 23. 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 Engineerof 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 sanitary sewer system to the subject property shall be completed prior to issuance of a building permit. 24. 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. 25. 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 Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 page 12 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. 26. Costs associated with design and construction of the off-site sewerextension 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. GRADING 27. 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 i JCS.:+.2 conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 13 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. 28. 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- 001 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. 29. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks to keep nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways, or gutters. 30. 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. 31. 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. 32. 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. 33. 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). conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 14 DRAINAGE 34. The applicant shall obtain public easements "without limitation as to tenure" for storm drainage purposes for release of stormwater runoff from the public street within Tentative Tract Map 33623 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. 35. 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 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. 36. 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 forthe 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. 37. All stormwater runoff passing through the site shall be accepted and conveyed within the proposed public street 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 U conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 15 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. 38. 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 forthe 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 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. 39. 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 from the vacant parcel west of the subject property (identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-001)to the Whitewater River levee. The storm drain improvement plans shall be approved by RCFC prior to approval of a grading plan. 40. A storm drain easement shall be obtained across the vacant parcel west of the subject property (identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 677-030-001) 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. The public storm drain easement shall be granted by the record property owner and recorded with the Riverside County Recorder prior to approval of a final map or issuance of a grading permit. 41. If the Final Hydrology Report demonstrates that the 100-year developed stormwater runoff volume is not contained within the public street right-of-way, easements for storm drainage purposes shall be dedicated to the City adjacent to the public street right-of-way as required to contain the 100-year stormwater runoff. � n�y +. ° ��r,�G.nF�O Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 16 GENERAL 42. 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. 4:3. All proposed utility lines shall be installed underground. 44. All existing utilities shall be shown on the Grading Plan required forthe project. The existing and proposed service laterals shall be shown from the main line to the property line. 45. Upon approval of any improvement plan bythe 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. 46. 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 certificate of occupancy. Any modifications or changes to approved improvement plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to construction. 47. Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any 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. 4£3. 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. (DD"',13 Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 17 NIAP 49. 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 forthe 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. 50. 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. 51. 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 677-030-001 and 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 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. TRAFFIC 52. 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: Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 18 a. The applicant shall pay a fair share percentage of 0.11% (or$167.70)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 0.25% (or$748.20) 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 0.29% (or$438.60)forthe installation of a traffic signal at Vista Chino and Whitewater Club Drive prior to approval of a final map. 53. 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 Helene's Trail frontage of the subject property. 54. 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. 55. Construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be provided foron 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. 56. This property is subject to the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee which shall be paid prior to issuance of building permit. POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. Developer shall comply with Section II of Chapter 8.04 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. BUILDING DEPARTMENT: 2. 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 006,L-51, Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 19 Engineering requirements, City of Palm Springs Fire Protection Plan, Vol II, 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 24' 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 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. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 33623 Page 20 11. Further Comments: Further comments as conditions warrant. 12. Fire Flow: Fire flow will be estimated once the square footage and type of construction is known. END OF CONDITIONS M U a CITV OF PALM SPRINGS, COUNTY OF RIVERSIEDE. STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN 1H£LIb OF PAW SPRINGS g �-ENTA�-�VEj EPr or TRACT AP 33623 RN£RSiDE WUN ,, LAUFORNM g LOT)IN ME PoN ST O XP OF sXRj q fi.Wl 150U .R ,-5 ,l,SW I11M M 91SE.wo uERrvuN ITENTATIVE a 5 >)rr rnlwry Or P..^.^.FS.'C: G.1101;-1%Allover TO'WE L,CgL Pur rh4WEv 7RgCTMAP NO.33623 N \\ ff4— f =� tO � t� wrw �! limes cu runn WT T o G �jK I �� ..4 .'. I l"� rvexz mirsmorrYM�fxD .y uvcnA�area ..4. H MAIYF aFIM1A[. aw.v { ����.'`sm Rnmv mat fwnWrraat v/ '� am aa.tv�u LO CL 442.0 PAD ELEVATION e ` 1 W 67 o3coR I-o02 PROPOSED TU. 33443 I VIdIN11'Y MAP O ! eu"roses w.x V' i r Q �� CITY OF PALM SPRINGS QPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DRAFT March 22, 2006 Lj ®RAFT 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. 4. Case 33623 TTM - An application by Contempo Homes for a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide an approximate 3.42 acre parcel into 10 single family residential lots ranging from 9,754 to 19,841 square feet located north of Via Escuela and west of Gene Autry Trail, Zone R-1-D, Section 6, APN 677-030-019. Chair Marantz stated she has a business related conflict of business and would not participate in the discussion and vote for Items 4 and 5. The meeting was turned over to Vice Chair Hochanadel. She left the Council Chamber at 2:20 p.m. Principal Planner, Edward Robertson, gave background information as outlined in the staff report dated March 22, 2006. He indicated this tract is one the three subdivisions proposed by the same applicant in the same general vicinity. Further discussion was made regarding the driveways for lots 2 and 3. Marcus Fuller, Assistant Director of Public Works, recommended the Planning Commission make a finding for a reduced right-of-way width less than 50 feet for a public street otherwise the 50 feet is a standard requirement. Chair Hochanadel opened the Public Hearing. Lance O'Donnell, O'Donnell, Escalante Architects, gave further information regarding the tribal trust and allottee portions, design of homes, landscaping and reduced right-of-way. Harriet Pierce, lives in surrounding neighborhood, voiced her concern regarding traffic issues. Donald Bradhurt, lives on Verona Road, concerned about traffic in this area and on Gene Autry Trail towards the 10 Freeway. A recess was taken at 2:39 p.m. for technical difficulties. Returned from recess at 2:53 p.m. Ed Torres, representing Contempo Homes, gave further information concerning the Tribal parcel and clarified the proposed number of homes. )' n� TV r Y inn r� fnrth-r rnnv-- ate tl-- '�nl-f- " - I ' (�'` Discussion was made regarding traffic improvements on Gene Autry Trail. M/S/C (Ringlein/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. �o pALM Sp9 �2 V u k t 11 9`'k°"N� Planning Commission Staff Report Date: March 22, 2006 Case No.: TTM 33623 Application Type: Tentative Tract Map, to subdivide an approximately 3.42-acre parcel into 10 single-family residential lots Location: North of Via Escuela and West of Gene Autry Trail Applicant: Contempo Homes —Alexander Village Zone: R-1-D (Single Family Residential) General Plan: L-6 (Low Density Residential) AIPN: APN: 677-030-019 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 33623), and is a request by Contempo Homes to subdivide an approximately 3.42-acre parcel into ten (10) single-family residential lots within an R-1- D zoned area. The residential lots will range in size between 9,754 to 19,841 square feet. The subject property is located along the north side of Via Escuela and west of Gene Autry Trail. 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 TTM 33623 Page 2 of 8 BACKGROUND AND SETTING: This tract is one of three abutting subdivisions being proposed by Contempo Homes for the Alexander Village and Alexander Villa Estates. Tentative Tract Map 33623 is a request for the creation of ten new single-family residential lots within an R-1-D zoning designation. The subject property is an approximately 3.42-acre, relatively flat vacant parcel located at the north side of Via Escuela and west of Gene Autry Trail. Table 1: Surrounding land uses, General Plan, Zoning Land Use General Plan Zoning Nlorth Vacant C (Conservation) W (Watercourse) South Racquet Club L-6 R-1-C East Single Fam Housing L-6 P-1-C West Condominiums 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 acre with a minimum lot size requirement of 7,500 square feet, a minimum lot width of seventy-five (75) feet and minimum lot depth of hundred (100) feet. The proposed lot sizes will range from 9,754 to 15,946 square feet. The proposed density is approximately three units per net acre, which is well below the maximum density of six units per acre 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 a cul-de-sac along Helens Trail. There are no existing public streets improvements around the subject property, however all the proposed streets and access within and around the site are designed to meet the City's standards. There are two flag lots (lots 2 & 3) being proposed at the westerly section of the tract. These two lots do not meet the required front width requirement of seventy five (75) feet. The applicant is proposing thirty six (36) feet wide driveways into lot 1 and sixty five feet into lot 3. Although the minimum driveway width required by the City is sixteen (16) feet within the R-1 zones. The two lots meet and exceed the lot size requirement. 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. 2 6 n l"Jim- Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006 TTM 33623 Page 3 of 8 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 10 lots on an approximately 3.42-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 single-family residence 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 five dwelling units per acre and a maximum of six dwelling units per acre. The proposed density of approximately 3 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 3 Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006 l7M 33623 Page 4 of 8 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 found the environmental impacts of the proposed project to be less than significant with the these Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures: MIM 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. 4 °�i ° planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006 7TM 33623 Page 5 of 8 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 PMfo 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. 5 Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006 TTM 33623 Page 6 of 8 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. 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) MN4 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) MNI 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 6 c re Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006 17M 33623 Page 7 of 8 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) N1M 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) MIM 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) Planning Commission Staff Report March 22,2006 17M 33623 Page 8 of 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. 4Direcof and O. R lrtson t ing,iA ICP Principal Planner . Ian ' g Services ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Reduced copy of TTM 33623 3. Draft Resolution / Conditions of Approval 4. Initial Study/ Environmental Assessment in J PROOF OF PUBLICATION 2�[uP "R � hislg9(aSifolCGzuntyclrrk�sFilingStamp (2O15.5.C.C.P) r ` STATE OF CALIFORNIA No. 0@46 -- --- --- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HPA13ING County of Riverside CITY COUNCIL CITY OFPALM SPRINGS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33623 CONTEMPO HOMES NORTH OF VIA ESCUELA& WEST OF GENE AUTRY`RAIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of popf the City of Palm Springs, Callfornla,will hold a ,utillc hearing at Its mwting of Appril 5,2006.The the County aforesaid;I and over the age of eighteen a .'l Ch. meaTioq begins at 6.00 p.m., in Inc Council Champer at City Hill,3200 East Tahgm¢ years,and not a party to or interested in the Canyon Way Palm Spri 7s. above-entitled matter. 1 am the principal clerk of a The puiposl, of this heanrlq is to consider an ap- printer of the,AESERT SUN PUBLISHING plIca Ion Contempo I-lomos for 6rentative TraoT Map 13023 To subdivide an approximate 3.47- COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, rcrc parcel imo 10 smge-tomi y residenhai lots ranging born 7500 to 1 ,000 square foot in size. printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, 'rhn loct she a located north of Via Egcucl7 County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been and 6 eat of Gone Autry mail, zone I4-7-D, sec- adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Riverside,Stale of California under the date of March 24,1988.Case Number 191236;that the notice,ofwhich the —� annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller than non paricl,has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: -- March 25a',2006 • I' 'I'°I I i i hI o , ,:v.,ra sim.mi.nv ' All in the year 2006 "'-"-" - _- ENVIRONMENTAL, OETERMINATION: A Oraft I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the No paTlve uaclaration was prepared for nvs project under the puidellnog of the Calliornla Environmen- foregoing is true and correct. III Quality Act(CEQA)and will To reviewed by the City Council at the hearing, Members of the pub- lic mayy view this document at me Planningg Ser- Ih viGos Oepsrtinenl, City Hall, 3200 East 7nhquitz Dated at Palm Springs,California this-----2'7 ,—day Canyon Way, Palm Springs, end suymlt wi txen cornmcnts et or prior To, Tha Ci'ly Council hear. re, 2006 REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION:The staff report and other auppoefo documents requr this project are available far ppu611c review at ClCI� Hall between The hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5,0 _�----.�_--_,�---- pp m., Monday throe h Fnday. Please contuct the //JJ'� Cf(ce of the CIt Clerk aC (/GOj 323-e204 if you Sigllatare \ �� would like to achadulu an appointment to review tho.•o documents, COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Response to this nollce may be made m;rbally at Tile Public Hearing entl/pr In writing before The hearin��TT WrIT- ten commons may be made to this City Gouncll by (utter(for in-ill or hand deimrry)to: James Thompson Clyyry Clerk •®�•® � 3200Palm Springs, CA g226 way Any challenge of tho proposed Project In court III be limited to ralsing only those issues raised at the public hearing dr,scribed In lhit notice, or In wriTlcn correspondence delivered to The City Clerk at, or pprior, to the ppublic hearing. (Gdvurn- Mont code $oFtien 6500 [g1l2j) An opportunity will Ind given at aald hearing icr all Intoresred parsons to be heard.Questlphd repard- I IThis case may be directed To Edward C.Tveb- eson, P,annlpg Services Department, at 750.323-6245 Si 1lecesaa ayutla con esxa carta, poravor(lame a Is Ciudad do Palm Springs puede hablar con Nadine Flcger teletono (7u0) 323-9245 James Thompson, City Clerk Published: 3/2 512 0 0 0 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33623 CONTEMPO HOMES NORTH OF VIA ESCUELA &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 33623 to subdivide an approximate 3.42-acre parcel into 10 single-family residential lots ranging from 7,500 to 10,000 square feet in size. The subject site is located north of Via Escuela and west of Gene Autry Trail, Zone 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 flame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs. y puede hablar con Nadine Fieger telefono (760) 323-8245 �v //��a es Thompson, City Clerk N "M .. Department of Planning Services , E (�% Vicinity Map s M- NA RD 4-H ri (VE dQ-42 V A ¢ NORLOTI ST w z c5 to cwa Uj w w ¢ 5 Legend EM Site C�50Q'Radiue VISTA CHI N - CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO: Tentative Tract Map 33623 DESCRIPTION: An application by Contempo Homes to subdivide an approximate 3.42 acre parcel into 10 single-family residential lots ranging from 7;500 to APPLICANT: Contempo Homes 10,000 square feet located north of Via Escuela and west of Gene Autry Trail, Zoned R-1-D, Section 6. APN: 677-030-019. t O�QpaILIVysA� ^ . . City of Palm SpriLngs u Office of the City Clerk 3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way • Palm Springs, California 92262 O �Q' Tel: (760)323-8204 • Fax: (760)322-8332 • Web: www.d.palm-spnngs.ca.us '9<i!POR� 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 33623 to subdivide an approximate 3.42-acre parcel into 10 single-family residential lots ranging from 7,500 to 10,000 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 25t" day of March, 2006. X,dAMES THOMPSON 6 City Clerk y' /kdh H:\USERS\C-CLK\Hearing Notices\AfFdavit-Contempo TTM33623 040506.doc Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION REPS MS APRIL HILDNER Public Hearing Notice (TAHQUITZ RIVERS ESTATES) MR TIM HOHMEIER Case TTM 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 FLOSS (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 LEONARD 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 - 7 }tlw =,iF1E:r PALM SPRINGS MODERN COMMITTEE fll r�fr_t '1G 5kT6�: Ii13f�d 1 h 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 I I I I I I INDIANS 650 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MR EDWARD TORRES THE KEITH COMPANIES CONTEMPO HOMES, INC. 73-733 FRED WARING DR., 9100 1701 N. PALM CANYON DR.,#1 PALM DESERT, CA 92260 SPONSORS I I 1 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 1b // �J 3O3To k I/ �`/ 33�02� (IC naa� . OS 0 6 501-411-001 501-442-022 501-443-020 UI Walnut Estates Inc Harry & Regina Olton Veronic oyse II 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 Ii Us Dept Of Interior 32 Stone Pillar Ln PO Box 723427 Washington, DC 21401 Fort Valley, VA 22652 , Atlanta, GA 31139 501-411-00 V 501-422-015 677-471-041 Federi A De Toledo XM Taniel & Makroohi Nishanian George P & Lynn Rice 286 Alisop P1 5640 Springbrook Or 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 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 Dr 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- 501-422-008 N Cryder Geor Suel �`"j Alan L Walter 1 555 E Ocean Blvd 810 15 2 Rosehaven Ln 4164 Ventura Canyon Ave Long Beach, CA 90802 anyon 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 j 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 Cc j 1546 Verde Vista Dr 507 Florence Ave PO Box Boo 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 Dr 227 Joannie 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 Chand:Ler Dr 11304 Red Cedar Or 1533 W Hays St San Diego, CA 92117 San Diego, CA 92131 Banning, CA 92220 677-040-0 K dd 677-030-022 677-030-024 David Celine Kaiser /� Cvcwd Cvcwd 302 Avenida Ximino PO Box 105B PO Box 1058 thedral City, CA 92234 Coachella, CA 92236 Coachella, CA 92236 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�rnico y� M Barbara So].dano *B* Phillip J Catalli �3393 as /" 74368 Parosella St 44421 Town Center Way C t 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 Bean 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 e !�1 John C Phelan Yolanda Espinoza Steve rtinez XM 2081 N Los Alamos Rd 2288 E Amado Rd 1315 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 Tiy ik /%fY �3 bl 501-402-0 6' 501-402-009 501-402-010 Peter derson 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 1800 N Whitewater Club Dr 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 2670 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�q 3a3S�o 7�/ 501-442-011 LGeorgeJ4 1-44 -014 501-442-016 Tr Quarto randsen !"" Daniel H & Patricia Carroll 1807 N Whitewater Club Dr 9 itewater Club Dr 2005 N Whitewater Club Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 m Srings, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-442-021 501-442-022 501-444-003 Joe & Tammi Lanni 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 Arnico St 2061 Arnico St 2051 Arnico 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 Arnico St 2031 Arnico St 2021 Arnico 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 Arnico St 3251 Arnico St 3273 Arnico 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 Arnico St 3349 Arnico St 3437 Arnico 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 Arnico St 3525 Arnico 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. I Salvador & Benita Alvarez Zacharias Comparan 3547 Arnica 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 3,9 iY 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 677-470-03'i1 677-470-032 677-470-033 Gildardo R & E1vi.a 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 2065 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 P. & 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 677-471-01?1 677-471-014 677-471-015 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 922262 677-471-025 677-471-026 y N] 677-471-027 Jean M Wyman Sandra havarria Salvado & Rosa Urrutia 2035 Marni Ct 2030 aeon Ct 2040 as on Ct Palm Springs, CA 92262 P m Springs, CA 92262 m Springs, 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 677-471-0.33 677-471-034 677-471-035 Adrian Qu.iroz Tr Pilter Eugenio & Luz Osorio 2043 Jason Ct 2033 Jason Ct 2012 Arnico St Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 677-471-0-i6 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 SteinbrueckE 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 & Gandy 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 356 m Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 i 501-442-004 1501-402-013 % 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 CD 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 501-411-0710 501-411-011 501-411-012 Margaret 11 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 6, 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 i i Carl V & Patricia Modugno 2380 N San Antonio Rd 2352 N San Antonio Rd I 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 • 7 501-424-009 501-424-011 501-424-013 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 Sani 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 /C..Nl 501-431-017 Walter L Brown Cora L 'co 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 501-431-018 501-431-019 501-442-001 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 1 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-443-004 501-443-005 501-443-006 John J Matthews *B* I Bong K Wijaya Lloyd & Lisa Nickerson 2050 N San Clemente Rd i 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 501-443-01.2 501-443-013 501-443-014 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''M Ruth Laughrin Jose A Guiterrez Walter & Sondra Debruyn 2009 N San Clemente Rd 2025 N San Clemente Rd 207 N San Clemente Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 m Springs, CA 92262 501-444-020 501-413-0 677-471-029 Tr Hyland E Str3jAs Armando Rodriguez 161 Civic Dr 8 PO J36x 498 PO Box 817 Palm Springs, CA 92262 P4fm Springs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92263 677-471-044--� /Ul 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 i 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, CAy 92270 677-470-016 501-421-017 677-040- �� I Christopher E & Nancy Whitnei 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 . vine, 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 • TiM 3 a.3S-o of 7l-// 33(�23 C'c� 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 677-470-03,6 677-040-029 501-442-013 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 Richard A & Mary Conant Larry H Stinson in Colucci / 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 /'Z-M George Duffy George Duffy Amaral Teucking Inc 3527 Mt Diablo Blvd 297 3527 Mt Diablo Blvd 297 PO B 915 Lafayette, CA 94549 Lafayette, CA 94549 on City, CA 94587 501-411-006 677-471-01 r *** 287 Printed *** Marsh K & Octavia Eckhardt Shelle Abbey `' 7015 Mesa Dr PO 1570 Aptos, CA 95003 rndale, WA 98248 O�?ALMgp� N City ®f Palm Springs + Office of the City Cleric 3200 E.Tah uitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 * �Oavoanrev' � 9 Y Y � C �P Tel:(760) 323-8204 • Fax: (760) 322-8332 • Web:www.ci.palm-springs.ca us q�/FORS 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, Kli.Fo�;61.. Kathie Hart, CMC Chief Deputy City Clerk /kdh HAUSERS\C-CLK%Headng NoticesTubitc Heanng Notices to BIA-Contempo 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 ��y� INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS•S 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 Fi e 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 j 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-D (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 INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4• 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-D17,500sf.); 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-1-13 (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- 1-1) 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. Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-2 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT '.' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 11 c) 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 Reservations 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. PROTECT 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. I ? _ Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-3 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT + ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':• 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. TTM 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- i 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 Figgre 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. ,Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-4 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •:' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4- TABLE 4-1 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS • . • L DATE • • • • � . WAYNAME • • TA 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 • Arnico Street Existing/with T-intersection stop 1/5/05 Proposed Extension sign(proposed to become a 4-way stop sign) Contempo Drive Proposed T-intersection stop N/A Sig 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. frl Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-5 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ':• 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: • 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) • LOS D -Approaching Unstable,tolerable delays (35.1-55 seconds) Y LOS E-Unstable operation,significant delays (55.1-80 seconds) • LOS F-Forced Flow,excessive delays.(>80 seconds) i Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-6 Palm Springs F Country Club Z Verona Road m c Project Site Via Escuela 5 6 7 4 3 in a L LL U Vista Chino 1 3 2 STUDYAREA INTERSECTIONS TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDY AREA The Kn2M1 Cvmpenleel I I NOT TO SCALE Figure 9 ��l INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT d• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS*S 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 Wbnoewater Club Drive @ Vista SB LR Midday 32.7 D SB LIZ 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 WE LTR PM >50 F Whitewater Club Drive@ Via 5. Escuela All Midday 7.5 A All PM 7.9 A 6. Armco Street @ Via Escuela NB LTR Midday 9.1 A SB LTR Midday ONE 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: I Movement:Ell LTR=Eastbound combination left through right turn lane 2 Peak Hour--highest volume from 114PM 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 f � i Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-8 rn INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖ Under 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 (ITE) 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 ITE 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 • USE FADT IN OUT • 118 SF Detached Homes 1,211 23 69 78 46 ' Source:LOS Engineering,Inc.Draft Traffic Impact Analysis,Contempo Homes(Alexander Village£a 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 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':' 1 TABLE 4-4 EXISTING+PROJECT INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE Movement Existing+Project Intersection 5 tm Delay' LOS' DeIta3 Impac 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 WE 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,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 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 How-The highest traffic volume from I l-1PM for Midday and from 4-6PM for PM l Y i Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-10 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ':• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖ TABLE 4-5 EXISTING+PROJECT SEGMENT ADT VOLUMES CHINOVISTA WHITEWATER VIA CLUB ESCUELA 4Vhitewater I-10 Via Escuela Farrell Vista Chino Club 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 2/23104 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 .f of Palm Springs,January 27,2005. Notes:TWLTL=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 23L 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). Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 i�•� TKC 40778.05 Page 4-161- � ""� INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ':' ENWRONMENTALANALYSIS ':' 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 unbound 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). 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 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-12 ;; INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •:• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS•:' TABLE 4-6 EXISTING+PROJECT+CUMULATIVE INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE Movement Peak Existing+Project Existing+Prj+ Intersection 3 I-lour4 Cumulative 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 5A 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 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)Arnico 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:EB LTR=Eastbound combination left through right turn lane 4 Peak Hour--The highest traffic volume from 11-1PM for Midday and from 4-6PM for PM Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-13 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS r � TABLE 4-7 EXISTING+PROJECT+CUMULATIVE SEGMENT ADT VOLUMES 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 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&Vista Estates)City of Paint Springs,January 27,2005. Notes:TWUL--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 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-14 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 2025 2025 Intersection Hot-it, 7 T Peal< Dela LOS2D• • • • 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,Contempo Homes (Alexander Village&Vista Estates)City of Palm Springs,Januanj 27,2005. Notes: 1 Delay is measwed in seconds 2 LOS=Level of Service �1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 'TKC 40778.05 Page 4-15 � " INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •:* ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS`S 3 Del to=The increase in delay from the project 4 Impact resulting from the project?(yes or no) 5 Movement:Ell LTR=Eastbound combination left through right turn lane 6 Peak Hour—The highest traffic volume from l I-IPM for Midday and from 4-6PM for PM TABLE 4-9 EXISTING+PROJECT SEGMENT ADT VOLUMES CHINOSTREET GENE GENE VISTA WHITEWATER VIA CLUB DRIVE ESCUELA TRAIL TRAIL From I-10 Via Escuela Farrell Vista Chino Whitewater Club To Via Escuela Vista Chino Gene Autry Via Escuela Gene Autry Trail 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£d Vista Estates)City of Palm Springs,January 27,2005. l � 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: 1^1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4- 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 long-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 Trail/Via 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 r Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-17 �� � � INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •S ENWRONMENTALANALYSIS❖ 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 (TUNE), 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 safehj 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. In 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. t. 1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-18 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4• 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. f) 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 SunLine 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. i Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 4077&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 EstateslAlexander 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. • 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 TrailNia 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 4120 INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT + ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS •A i 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 Cahfomia; 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, Oa, PM10 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 Oa) 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. i Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-21 01_)17"13 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ';' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS+ j 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') FEDERALSTATE AND POLLUTANT STANDARD 111 2001 200211 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 1-hour>35 ppm 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 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 cony (ppm) NM NM NM NM Inhalable Particulates(PM1o)3 State 24-hour>50 @)g/m3 0 1(2) 3(5.1) ** Federal 24-hour>150(og/m3) 0 0 0 ** Max.24-hour cone. (o /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. 1/ Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4,22 �)� INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL 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 working 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 CO 550 550 NO. 100 55 ROG 75 55 SO. 150 150 PM10 150 150 Source: SCAQMDCEQA Air Quality Handbook,Chapter6. 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 quality violation; 2) generation of vehicle trips that cause a CO "hot spot"; 3) creation of i 1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-23 Ali 1��`j INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS j 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 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-24 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS updates the attainment demonstration for federal standards for ozone and PMio; 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.agmd.govov/anmp/). 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? 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. e' 1j Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-25 �(% �Y INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS •:' TABLE 4-12 FEDERAL AND STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS POLLUTANTFEDERAL STANDARD STANDARD Ozone(03) 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 pprn Annual 0.03 ppm Sulfur Dioxide(SO2) 24-Hour 0.14 ppm 0.04 ppin 1-Hour 0.25 ppm PM10 Annual 50 µg/m3 20 µg/m3 24-HovR 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 p91,n3=Microgramsper 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 f3 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT + 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 (SO2) results from the combustion of high sulfur content fuels. Fuel combustion is the major source of SO2, 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(PM10 and PM2.5) 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. PM10 refers to finely divided solids or liquids such as soot, dust, and aerosols which are 10 microns or less in diameter and can enter the lungs. Fine particles are those less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter and are also referred to as PNh.s. 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 project's quarterly emissions are determined by averaging over a 3-month period (including only actual working days), it is possible to not exceed the quarterly thresholds while exceeding the daily thresholds shown in Table 4-13. 1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-27 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT -.*- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':• i TABLE 4-13 EMISSIONS SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD CRITERIA(POUNDS/DAY) POLLUTANT • ROG NO. • 0 Operational Emissions r Pounds/Day 550 55 55 150 150 Construction Emissions Pounds/Da 550 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. 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. f ` Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-28 w`� INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4-ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4: TABLE 4-14 ESTIMATED EMISSIONS RESULTING FROM PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES(POUNDS/DAY) ROG NOxCO S02 0 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST 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 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 6.00 5.89 1.50 1.48 1.69 0.63 0.03 0.0 0.00 0.00 NIA N/A N/A N/A Emissions 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 NIA N/A N/A N/A i Emissions t - - 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 Ibs/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 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-29 a 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: Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-30 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT ':' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':' 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 PMio Emissions: Gradin • 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. , Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-31 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT 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. i 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 41+4 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 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates ,July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-33 c qs q+�- 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. t Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4T4' INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ':' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':• Figure 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? ( 1 1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-35 �, INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ 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 Signnificant Impact: The project site is approximately 1 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. f) 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 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-36 10 o•° Ell iT. Ti Ti iG .■, m 'tea► `'�� r� _ jj eH \ �pu 0 ■i ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ •�I ee ev o'N71 US rarap �fnllll.-�- 9402 RAN FUTURE CHEL CONTOURS AND NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATION WITHOUT PROPOSED MITIGATIO ALEXANDER VILLAGE AND ALEXANDER VISTA ESTATES / V t 40778.05 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT F7. Future Exierio,CNEL with Sonur AM."Inell.ri B.Ir-,.,hj[flpth, Location Uutuiflgavl CNEL Barrier ff.j,ht Mitigm-d CNEL R-2 4exanderVillage 62.2 61 1 AV- R-3 A9x.nd.rVJ]a,e 64S 62.7 R-4 M.x.rd.,Mfl,e 676 12 64.0 R14 Aexsnuer virage 71 8 12 62.8 7 R-6 AexanderVilage 75.5 12 64.2 % R11 R-7 gaxandsrViiage 754 12 643 S R-8 AhxarderVilfage 742 12 63.6 R-9 AeXanderVillage 681 12 647 RID Nexander Village 652 12 634 7�"'N P-11 AaxanderMllage 621 6 $ R-12 Al.x.nde,Vista Estates 603 R1 R-13 AJ.mride,Vsta Estates 676 6 Estates 597 R12 -,g mittgated CNELis in camphance,cmingation is required at 7, R9 Alexander Vista Estates 71 r— . ..... T, 12-Foot High Sound Wall B Alexander Village Q,a I 12-Foot High r Sound Wall R7 R4 R5 SM PROPOSED SOUND ATTENUATION BARRIER MITIGATION Q NOT TO SCALE Figure 7 9 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS�:• STANDARD CONDITIONS OR REQUIREMENTS SC 4-1 The project shall comply with the Construction Site Regulations (Cihj 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. i } ,Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-39 INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ':' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS'S 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 Figure 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. ( 1 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. t t Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 440 r� INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖ 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 Signhficant 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, j 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 4A, 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 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-41 �� INITIAL STUDY(ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':' 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 less 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 i 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 apprpval Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-42 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 night 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. Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-43 1 , s 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/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':' i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Map issued by the State Geologistfor 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, Inc., 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 4-45 y t. INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ❖ iv) 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 geotedmical 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 7 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? l Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-46, , �1- 1 c INITIAL STUDY(ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS g+ 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 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 Investigation. 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. �1 .Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-47 INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ❖ i 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 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 'Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-48 INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT d+ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS V 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 EIR, 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)? i Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-49 INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4- 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 EIR (Page 5-100) and the Palm Springs General Plan (Pages U-63 and II-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 i Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-50 ,� INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 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 Chub 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. f � Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-51 u.. INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL 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. I 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. ( 1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-52 INITIAL STUDY(ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT 'SENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 'i• (` 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. f) 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 Jaw requires that the project not increase or concentrate flows to downstream properties and the s. Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-53 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 Ill 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 111-5). 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 seiche, 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 seiche, 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 seiche, tsunami or mudflow and no mitigation is required. Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-54 INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 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 1 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 of the following locations: f� Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-55 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS�0-• 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 hidian Affairs Palm Springs Agency,901 East Tahquitz Canyon Way,Suite C- 101,Palm Springs, Californa 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 f j Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-56 1 R7 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT 'S ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS':' 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 RECORD • OF • PROPERTY NAME PROXIMITITO LISTING COMMENTS STATUS PROJECT SITE The Desert Sun .75 mules 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 • Facility Index Systems File shows a letter of (FIRS)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- 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. Agencu 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-S7 L�;i 1r7"1�1A INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT -*.- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS'S 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 STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL 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 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 'i3 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS i 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? Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 T.KC 40778.95 Page 4-60 �}} PtaRT INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT -.*- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖ 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 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. •Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-61 n r INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •S 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 Protection/Paramedic 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 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 7 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-62 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 Departments 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 Sheriff's 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 map 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 1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-63 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 'S ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 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 a 1 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 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 acres 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 4-65 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •S ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Less Than Sigxnificant Impact: Construction of recreational facilities that are planned for the proposed projects would not have an adverse affect on the environment. PROJECT 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 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 \7 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 'CKC 40778.05 Page 4-66 �+ n INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4- 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. Thus 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. r Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-67 �� � LEGEND PROJECT BOUNDARY A APN677-030-001 *" TOPO CONTOURS B APN 677.030.032 f DIRT TRAILS C APN 677-030-019 THCP BOUNDARY HABITAT TYP�E1 r' �FWIE� '=�%h11)) u JAL`J �Owe t �� pm :o �j m % , 3tZi LZO ��•*- i �', /d� 7j 1�� �~/�Fi�ij�) P\\r\,I� ' rin 'r.zr���� ) t r�\r��n �J��'rl , uJ 4 ii t 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 Whitewaler Club Road and South of Via Escuela Road. PROJECT AREA BIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES MAP Figure 12 NOT TO SCALE INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT ❖ 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, eiiher 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 r'^1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-69 INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4' 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. t 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 commuitity 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 no �I Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-70 )A 4?a 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. PROTECT DESIGN FEATURES PD 11-1 The project shall prevent access to open water sources that would attract sensitive species. +, 1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-71 qn T INITIAL STUDY(ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT d• 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 mariner 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. 1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-72 n INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS❖ 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#60E),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 (Patin 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 17) 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 STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •S 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 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 STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT •:• 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. 4 ! I Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-75 &q �a�y INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ❖ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ❖ 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 find 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. 1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-76 ,h INITIAL STUDYIENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT `* ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS V 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 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-77 n 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 Z600 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 y Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-78 0 . nF INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4- 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 r 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 0.51%, 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 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'8 Retention and Detention Basin policies. Alexander Vista Estates has been designed to pass the 100-year offsite flows (144.08 efs) 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 corner 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 t �f 7° INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT *.*- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS o• 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 I1-63 and 1I-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 plants 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 projects solid waste disposal needs and no additional mitigation is required. 7 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-82 �� INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 44 i 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 STUDY/ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT ❖ 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 S1350). 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 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-84 el, INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 6• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4+ 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 SCAG Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-85 ,� °7 INITIAL STUDY(ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 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 n , 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 REOUIREMENTS There are no Standard Conditions or Requirements related to socioeconomics/ 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. W §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. i 1 Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 TKC 40778.05 Page 4-88 '� INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT -.*- 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 Incomorated: 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. a Alexander Village and Alexander Vista Estates July,2005 Lf `7"l TKC 40778.05 Page 4-89