Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout22625 - RESOLUTIONS - 12/2/2009 RESOLUTION NO 22825 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2008061084) FOR THE MUSEUM MARKET PLAZA SPECIFIC PLAN, INCLUDING AMENDMENTS TO THE 2007 PALM SPRINGS GENERAL PLAN, ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 22077, AND THE PALM SPRINGS ZONING CODE, MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT; ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS; AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM. The City Council of the City of Palm Springs finds: A. On July 5, 2006, the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palm Springs approved "Design for Development" master plan boundaries and the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines and Section 14 Master Plan as foundation "design for development" criteria. B. On November 17, 2007, the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palm Springs designated "Focused Development Area One" boundaries within the "Design for development" master plan area- C. On April 30, 2008 Wessman Development, Inc. presented to the City a draft Specific Plan for the Museum Market Plaza, an area of land within the "Focused Development Area One" boundaries. D. On May 21, 2008, the City Council initiated a Specific Plan review process and directed staff to report on the conformance of the draft Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan with the Palm Springs General Plan, Downtown Design Guidelines and Palm Springs Zoning Code. E. On June 4, 2008, staff presented to the City Council an initial look at the draft Specific Plan in light of the City's existing regulations, including staff comments and recommendations for subsequent review- F. On June 13, 2008, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study on the project indicating that a draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) would be prepared on the proposed Specific Plan. The NOP was circulated to responsible agencies and interested groups and individuals for review and comment. A copy of the Notice of Preparation and comments thereon are included in Appendix A of the Draft EIR. The comment period ran from June 16 to July 17, 2008. G. On July 1, 2008 a public Scoping Meeting was held to receive comments on preparation of the draft Environmental Impact Report- H. On July 16, 2008, the City Council received the list "alternatives" to the project that would be evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report. 608750 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 2 analyze its environmental effects. The City prepared an EIR on the range of development that would be permitted within the Specific Plan or Project Area. The EIR evaluates the various policies and development standards for a master planned, mixed use project that would accommodate retail, office, high density residential, and resort development, and the environmental impacts the Project would cause if it were approved and developed. The DEIR was circulated for public review and comment from October 22, 2008, through December 17, 2008. J. The City received numerous written and oral comments on the DEIR. The City prepared responses that describe the disposition of significant environmental issued raised by the comments, and made changes to the DEIR. The comments, responses to comments, changes to the DEIR and additional information were published in a Final EIR dated January 1, 2009. The DEIR, the FEIR, and all the appendices comprise the "EIR" referenced in these findings and this Resolution. K. On December 3, 2008, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and City staff and its engineering and environmental consultants provided information about the Project. Members of the public had the opportunity to ask questions and express their concerns and interest about the Project. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a resolution recommending denial of the Project. The resolution was approved by the Commission on December 17, 2008. K. On January 14, 2009, the City Council conducted a public hearing, accepted testimony, and continued the matter. At this public hearing, City staff and its engineering and environmental consultants provided information about the Project and members of the public had the opportunity to ask questions and express their concerns and interest about the Project. L. On April 1, 2009, the City Council received additional public testiony testimony, closed the public portion of the hearing and continued the matter to the City Council meeting of May 13, 2009. M. On May 13, 2009, the City Council discussed certain issues related to the draft Project, provided direction to staff, and continued the matter. N. The record upon which all findings and determinations related to the Project are based includes the following: 1. The EIR and all documents referenced in or relied upon by the EIR. All information (including written evidence and testimony) provided by City staff to the Planning Commission and the City Council relating to the EIR, the proposed approvals for the Project, the Project or its alternatives. 2. All information (including written evidence and testimony) presented to the Planning Commission and the City Council by the environmental consultant and sub consultants who prepared the EIR, or incorporated into reports presented to the Planning Commission and the Council. 608750 1 Resolution No, 22625 Page 3 3. All information (including written evidence and testimony) presented to the City from other public agencies relating to the Project or the EIR. 4. All applications, letters, testimony, and hearing presentations given by any of project sponsor or property owner within the Project area or their consultants or representatives to the City in connection with the Project. 5. All information (including written evidence and testimony) presented at any public hearing or meeting related to the Project and the EIR. 6. All locally-adopted land use plans and ordinances, including, without limitation, general plans, specific plans, redevelopment plans, ordinances, and resolutions, including without limitation actions regarding "Design for Development," together with environmental review documents, findings, mitigation monitoring programs, and other documentation relevant to any development in the Specific Plan Area- 7- The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project. 8. All information (including written evidence and testimony) presented to the City Council in conjunction with the hearing on the designation of the Town and Country Center as a Class 1 historical site on June 24, 2009. 9. All other documents comprising the record pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21167.6(e). 10. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution is based are located at the City of Palm Springs Planning Department, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, CA 92262. The custodian for these records is the Director of Planning Services. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6. O. The EIR provides a program-level analysis of the environmental impacts of the Project, prepared pursuant to Section 15168 of the Guidelines. A Program EIR examines the total scope of environmental effects that would occur as a result of buildout of the entire proposed project. By examining the full scope of the proposed project and subsequent applications and approvals at this stage of planning, the Program EIR provides a full disclosure of the environmental impacts that may occur throughout the project site, together with an analysis of the site specific and cumulative environmental impacts that will occur throughout the buildout time frame of the project and may be found to support all levels of approval necessary to implement the Project. P. The findings contained in this Resolution and any Exhibit to this Resolution are based upon substantial evidence in the entire record before the City. Any reference to specific evidence, testimony, or documents, including pages or sections of the EIR set 608750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 4 forth in this Resolution or any attachment to this Resolution are for ease of reference and are not intended to provide an exhaustive list of the evidence relied upon for any findings or determinations in suc Resolution or attachment thereto. Q. The City recognizes that the EIR contains clerical errors. The City has reviewed the entirety of the EIR and bases its determinations on the substance of the information it contains. R. The EIR is adequate to support the approval of the Project and of each entitlement or approval that is the subject of the staff reports to the Planning Commission and the City Council, ordinance, or resolution to which these CEQA findings are attached. The City Council ratifies, adopts and incorporates the analysis, explanation, findings, responses to comments, and conclusions of the EIR. The City Council adopts the reasoning of the EIR, of the staff reports presented to the Commission and the Council, and of staff and the presentations provided by the owners of property within the Specific Plan Area and their consultants and representatives. S. The City recognizes that additional modifications have been made to the text of the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan since the EIR was published; all resulting in the Project in the form it is approved by this Resolution. These refinements have little to no effect on physical impacts of the Project and do not raise additional environmental concerns. Other changes were made to incorporate mitigation measures, or to make the Project more environmentally beneficial. Other changes were made to address planning, practical, financial, or logistical concerns and these changes have little to no effect on physical impacts of the Project. The City Council is appraised of all these modifications and determines that the EIR is adequate to support approval of the Project. The impacts of the Project as it is approved are within the range of impacts studied in the EIR. T. The City Council recognizes that the EIR incorporates information obtained and produced after the DEIR was completed, and that it contains additions, clarifications, and modifications. The City further recognizes that the additional modifications have been made as described in Finding S above. The City Council has reviewed and considered the FEIR and all of this information. Neither the FEIR, nor any of these modifications, adds significant new information to the DEIR that would require recirculation of the EIR under CEQA. The new information does not involve a new significant environmental impact, a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact, or a feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed and that would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the Project. The EIR adequately addresses the Project as it is approved by the City Council. The City Council has not received any information that indicates that the DEIR is inadequate or conclusory. U. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) and the Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council has balanced the benefits of the proposed project against unavoidable adverse impacts to scenic vistas and aesthetics, air quality, and historic 608750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 6 resources and has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to impacts to scenic vistas and aesthetics, air quality, and historic resources. The City also has examined alternatives to the proposed project; none of which meet both the project objectives and is environmentally preferable to the proposed project. V. Public Resources Code section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines section 15097 require the City to adopt a monitoring or reporting program to ensure that the mitigation measures and revisions to the Project identified in the EIR are implemented. The provisions of the Mitigation and Monitoring/Reporting Program ("MMRP") are discussed throughout the EIR and included as a part of the discussion regarding each Project Impact and the discussion of Mitigation Measures that relate to each Project Impact. The mitigation measures recommended by the EIR as reflected in the MMRP are specific and enforceable. As appropriate, some mitigation measures define performance standards to ensure no significant environmental impacts. The MMRP adequately describes conditions, implementation, verification, compliance, and reporting requirements to ensure the Project complies with the adopted mitigation measures. The MMRP ensures that the mitigation measures are in place, as appropriate, throughout the life of the Project. W. The mitigation measures comprise the measures necessary to reduce significant impacts to a level less than significant wherever it is feasible to do so. The City has substantially lessened or eliminated all significant environmental effects where feasible. The mitigation measures incorporated into and imposed upon the Project will not have new significant environmental impacts that were not analyzed in the DEIR. X. The City has not made any decision that constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources toward the Project prior to certification of the EIR, nor has the City previously committed to a definite course of action with respect to the Project NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Palm Springs resolves- SECTION 1. The City Council certifies that the EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA, that the EIR was presented to the City Council as the decision-making body, and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR prior to approving any aspect of the Project. Preparation of the EIR has been overseen by the City's Director of Planning and/or his representative, and the conclusions and recommendations in the document represent the independent conclusions and recommendations of the City. The EIR and these findings represent the independent judgment and analysis of the City. By these findings, the City Council confirms, ratifies, and adopts the findings and conclusions of the EIR, as supplemented and modified by this Resolution and the Exhibits to this Resolution. The City Council further certifies that the EIR is also adequate to support approval of each component of the Project, any project within the range of alternatives described and evaluated in the EIR, each component of any of these alternatives, and any minor modifications to the Project or the alternatives. The City Council also certifies that the EIR is adequate to support any future discretionary approvals needed to implement the Project. 608750 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 6 SECTION 2. The City Council adopts the "CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts" as provided in Exhibit "A" to this Resolution. SECTION 3. The City Council, after balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed project, has determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified in the EIR and Exhibit "A" may be considered "acceptable" due to specific considerations which outweigh the unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project. The City Council therefore adopts the "Statement of Overriding Considerations" as Provided in Exhibit "B" to this Resolution. Each of the separate benefits of the proposed project, as provided in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, is determined to be, unto itself and independent of the other project benefits, a basis for overriding all unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. SECTION 4. The City Council finds, accepts and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program, which is incorporated into the EIR, meets the requirements of Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code by providing for the implementation and monitoring of measures intended to mitigate potential environmental impacts. In the event of any inconsistencies between the Mitigation Measures as set forth in the EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan shall control. ADOPTED on the 18th day of November, 2009; and RE-ADOPTED this 2"d day of December, 2009. David H. Ready, onager ATTEST: mes Thompson, City Clerk 603750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 7 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 22625 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 the 18th day of November, 2009, and duly re-adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on the Z" day of December, 2009, by the following vote. AYES: Councilmember Foat, Councilmember Hutcheson, Councilmember Weigel, Mayor Pro Tem Mills, and Mayor Pougnet. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. mes Thompson, City Clerk ,� / City of Palm Springs, Calif ornia�f��T] Z��G G08750 I Resolution No. 22625 Page 8 EXHIBIT "A" CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF FACTS A. INTRODUCTION The EIR analyzed the potential impacts of the Specific Plan submitted to the City in April of 2008. The City Council, in its consideration of the proposed project since that time, has requested changes to the Specific Plan which in all cases reduce the potential intensity of development on the project site. In addition, the Specific Plan has been modified to eliminate maximum land use densities and intensities and the market will be allowed to determine the best mix of these uses. Development will be controlled through several regulations and policies contained in the Plan. Therefore, the descriptions and impacts provided herein represent the worst case scenario for the project site, and impacts are expected to be reduced as a result of the changes which have been integrated into the Specific Plan. Where appropriate in these findings the revised project's impacts are addressed. Project Description, Location, and Objectives Project Location The EIR analyzed a proposed project which consists of non-contiguous lands generally occurring at the northwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Palm Canyon Drive. The area is irregular in shape, and encompasses lands bounded by the Hyatt Suites hotel and Belardo Road on the north, Tahquitz Canyon Way on the South, Museum Drive on the west and North Palm Canyon Drive on the east, as well as lands directly east, between north Palm Canyon and Indian Canyon Drives. The proposed project is identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 513-092-010-3, 513- 092-009-3, 513-092-003-7, 513-560-002-0, 513-550-004-4, 513-560-007-7, 513-560- 008-8, and 513-560-009-9. The site can further be identified as a portion of Section 15, Township 4 South, Range 4 East, SBBM. Project Description The Specific Plan, as modified, proposes policies and development standards for a master planned, mixed use project to include Retail, Office, High Density Residential, and Resort development on 18.5 acres. The proposed project site analyzed in the EIR is irregular in shape, but is generally bounded by Andreas Road on the north, Tahquitz Canyon Way on the south, Museum Drive on the west, and Indian Canyon Drive on the east. The Specific Plan analyzed in the Final EIR allows for a broad range of development, with a mixed use theme. Retail-oriented commercial is required to be developed on the ground floor on Palm Canyon Drive, with some exceptions. A mix of professional office 609730 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 9 and/or retail development is envisioned on the ground floor on all other project roadways, and on the second and/or third floors of Blocks A, C, D and F. Additional uses that may be developed subject to the Specific Plan include hotels, multiple family residential, theaters, tourist-related services and public and semi-public uses. The Specific Plan analyzed in the EIR allows generally reflects the CBD zone and conforms to the Design Guidelines, with limited exceptions. The Development Standards included in Section III of the Plan set the range of permitted and conditionally permitted uses, as well as provide specific direction for preferred uses on certain street fronts. Also, standards for mass, height and setback standards are established to assure that variety in building mass and height is achieved. Within these standards, any combination of retail, office, residential and hotel development may be proposed. To provide a basis for environmental analysis, the EIR assumed a specific set of maximum land use intensities and densities, as follows- Table 1 Maximum Land Use Intensities Land Use Retail or Office (square feet 385,000 Residential (dwelling units 900 Hotel (rooms) 565 Changes to the Specific Plan Subsequent to the preparation of the EIR, the Specific Plan was modified. In addition to the deletion of specific maximum densities and intensities, the changes in the Specific Plan include: • A reduction in the maximum building height to 60 feet (except for hotels approved by the City Council), with lower building heights on the perimeter of the Plan area. • The elimination of Blocks J and L from the area included in the Specific Plan. • The incorporation of an option to remodel the existing Desert Fashion Plaza. Project Objectives The primary goal of the proposed project analyzed in the EIR is the revitalization of Downtown Palm Springs through the implementation of the following objectives. 1. Reintegrate the site into the economic, social and environmental fabric of the downtown. 2. Provide direct access to the Desert Art Museum from Downtown and Section 14. 3. Create an upscale, vibrant mixed-use lifestyle center, including boutique shops, galleries, neighborhood conveniences, restaurants, residential units and boutique hotels, serving visitors and local residents. cos�so i Resolution No. 22625 Page 10 4. Enhance the pedestrian environment and lower the dependence on the automobile by providing living, shopping and entertainment venues in a central location. 5. Encourage a variety of architectural designs, styles and heights with materials that include plaster, glass, stone, iron, masonry and concrete to create visual interest while utilizing the latest in green technology. 6. Reintegrate the pedestrian and automobile back into the core of downtown by reconnecting Belardo Road and creating a new boulevard (Museum Way) from the Museum to Indian Canyon. EFFECTS DETERMINED TO HAVE NO IMPACT The CEQA Guidelines Environmental Checklist Form was used to prepare an Initial Study, which was used by the City of Palm Springs to determine that all required environmental issues would be addressed in the EIR. The City determined that the proposed project would have no impact on agricultural resources, biological resources, and mineral resources. In addition, the Initial Study determined that there would be no impact associated with the proposed project for the following specific thresholds of concern: Cultural Resources a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5; c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature; d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Geology and Soils a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code, creating substantial risks to life or property. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater. 608750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 11 Hazards and Hazardous Materials c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. d) 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 create a significant hazard to the public or environment. e) Result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area for a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not yet been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. f) Result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area for a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. h) 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. Hydrology and Water Quality f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality. g) 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. h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows. 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. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Land Use and Planning a) Physically divide an established community. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Noise 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 expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 609750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 12 Population and Housing b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Transportation and Traffic c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. d) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks) EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT This section addresses issue areas found in the EIR to result in less than significant impacts. The changes made to the Specific Plan since the publication of the EIR will reduce the impacts described below further, and they will remain less than significant. Aesthetic Resources Impacts Light will continue to be emitted from the project site, and light from building sources will be increased from previous levels, insofar as the proposed structures include more square footage and greater mass than those presently existing on the site. Build out of the proposed project will therefore result in some increase in the existing levels of illumination, as well as some increase in glare from reflective building materials. The Specific Plan also includes a substantial multi-family residential component and thus introduces sensitive receptors to the area. Levels of lighting that are appropriate to other permitted uses in the project area may have some impact on residential uses. The proposed project will be required to comply with the City's lighting ordinances, which limit the amount of light spillage to adjacent property, regulate the intensity of lighting, and the use of screened fixtures. It is therefore expected that the implementation of the proposed project will have a less than significant impact on light and glare in the area. As described above, impacts associated with scenic vistas and light and glare are expected to be less than significant. In addition, the modifications made to the proposed project since the preparation of the EIR, particular the reduction in overall building height and the requirements for the lowering of building heights on the project edges, will result in reduced impacts in these issue areas. Further, the development standards and guidelines in the Specific flan will assure high quality design and sensitivity to the project's surroundings. The loss of the Town and Country Center represents a potentially significant impact insofar at it will eliminate this scenic resource. The Town and Country is discussed in Section 5 of this Exhibit relating to significant unavoidable environmental impacts. G08750 i Resolution No. 22625 Page 13 Air Quality Impacts The proposed project will generate emissions from equipment used in the demolition of existing structures; emissions from construction equipment as the project builds out; short and long term mobile emissions from increased motor vehicle activity; short term stationary source emissions from the operation of construction equipment; long term stationary source emissions from the production of electricity and the consumption of natural gas; and emissions associated with greenhouse gas production. The proposed project is generally consistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) plans and programs for the region, insofar as land use designations proposed are consistent with those used by SCAQMD in the preparation of these plans. Emissions associated with the demolition of existing structures will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds, resulting in less than significant impacts. Similarly, emissions expected from stationary equipment, asphalt paving and architectural coatings during construction will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds, resulting in less than significant impacts. The project is not expected to create or result in any objectionable odors. Therefore, impacts from objectionable odors will be less than significant. Geology and Soils Impacts The proposed project area is located outside those areas having a landslide potential, as identified in the General Plan. Although the project occurs near the foothills of the San Jacinto mountains, the potential impacts associated with landslides are expected to be less than significant. Hydrology and Water Resources Impacts Hydrology The proposed project includes the construction in a 36-inch storm drain in the extension of Belardo Road, from Tahquitz Canyon to the new east-west private street. This facility will collect storm flows from throughout the project in catch basins, direct them to the existing facilities on surrounding streets, and will deliver peak runoff values not exceeding existing conditions. Therefore, the project would not result in any significant impacts related to the amount or rate of stormwater runoff or drainage system effects- Project-specific impacts associated with drainage and surface runoff and the potential for increased flooding are expected to be less than significant. Development of the proposed project would result in further development and redevelopment in an already urbanized area. The project site is served by existing storm drains. Runoff from the proposed project and surrounding uses is directed into the 602730 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 14 adjacent streets, where it flows to the nearest drainage improvements. The Museum Market Plaza development would also drain to the surrounding street system. Little if any additional cumulative runoff would be expected from the project site since this part of the City is already fully developed with impervious surfaces. Therefore, cumulative impacts to the existing or planned stormwater drainage systems would be less than significant. Water Resources The project site will be subject to construction standards under NPDES that are designed to ensure water quality are not adversely affected. The project would be required to implement Best Management Practices and to conform to the existing NPDES water quality program and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit process. Therefore, cumulative water quality impacts would also be less than significant. Runoff resulting from project build out will be directed into existing storm drains. All contaminants would be disposed of in compliance with applicable stormwater pollution prevention permits, required by the City under its NPDES permit. Therefore, the project would not provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff to the storm drain system or increase storm water runoff from the project site above existing levels, and impacts will be less than significant. Population and Housing Impacts The General Plan estimates that the Land Use plan has a capacity for 51,406 housing units within the City limits and its Sphere-of-Influence, and that these housing units will result in a population of 94,950 at General Plan build out. The Specific Plan includes maximum square footages for each Block, and therefore a higher square footage of commercial space and/or hotel space would reduce the number of potential residential units which could be built within the project area. However, even at maximum build out at the densities projected in the DEIR, the proposed project would generate 5.3% of the potential additional units anticipated in the General Plan. The Southern California Association of Governments, in the preparation of its Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), has prepared projections for population and household growth in Palm Springs in the long term. The RTP projects that there will be 24,204 households in 2015, 24,416 in 2020, and 28,606 households in 2030 in the City. Using the SCAG growth forecast, and the total number of occupied housing units in the City currently, and given a projected project build out year of 2016, the City will have a demand for over 1,919 permanent housing units (not seasonal units) at project build out. Should the residential units within the project build out at the maximum allowed under the Specific Plan as described in the Draft EIR, the 955 housing units proposed within the Specific Plan area would represent 49.8% of all the new permanent housing required in the City under SCAG's growth predictions. If it is further assumed that 23.5% of the units within the project will be seasonal units, the proposed project would represent 730 permanent housing units, or 38.0% of the total demand in 2015. The 6ON750 I Resolution No 22625 Page 15 SCAG forecasts clearly indicate that there will be a need for at least twice as much housing in the City as that proposed within the project area. Therefore, the proposed project will not significantly induce growth in the City, and impacts will be less than significant. Public Services and Facilities Impacts As a generator of new jobs, the project may contribute, to a limited extent, to a cumulative increase in the population of the City. The project will be required to pay the State mandated school impact fees in place at the time of issuance of building permits. These fees are designed to offset the demand for facilities placed on the PSUSD by new development. The payment of the fees will assure that impacts associated with additional students will be less than significant. The PSUSD will continue to plan for growth in order to accommodate population increase in the City and overall, the project is not expected to have a significant impact on schools. The proposed project is not expected to have any significant adverse impacts on the medical facilities in the area. It is expected that all of the Valley hospitals will expand as needs are identified and that regional health care facilities will be able to adequately service the future population. The proposed project is not expected to have any significant adverse impacts on the library facilities in the area. It is expected that the facility will be able to adequately service the increase in population generated by the Specific Plan and that impacts on library services will be less than significant. The build out of the proposed project will generate additional demand for electrical power. The proposed commercial development will generate an estimated demand of 11,166,882 kwh per year, and the proposed residential development will generate an estimated demand for 5,373,308 kwh per year. The present supply capacity of SCE. is expected to be adequate to provide for increased consumption associated with the build out of the proposed project. The build out of the proposed project will generate additional demand for natural gas. The proposed commercial development will generate an estimated demand for 3,509,965 cubic feet per month, and the proposed residential development will generate an estimated demand for 3,830,983 cubic feet per month. The present supply capacity of SCG is expected to be adequate to provide for increased consumption associated with the build-out of the proposed project. 6US750 I Resolution No. 22625 Page 16 Recreational Resources Impacts Development of the proposed project may increase to some extent the usage of existing regional parks and recreational facilities, although these impacts are expected to be less than significant in relation to the volume of current recreational users. The proposed project is designed as an integrated community that offers a full range of active and passive on-site recreational amenities that are appropriate to its downtown location. The proposed project includes several open spaces for a variety of compatible recreational uses. Transportation and Traffic Impacts Emergency access throughout the Museum Market Plaza has been planned in a manner consistent with the requirements of emergency service providers and the Palm Springs Municipal Code. Implementation of the Specific Plan is therefore not expected to result in inadequate emergency access to any part of the site or impede emergency access to any neighboring areas. The SunLine Transit Agency provides bus transit service in the Specific Plan area, with three lines connecting downtown Palm Springs with neighboring parts of the City and other cities in the Coachella Valley. Build out of the proposed project is not expected to have any significant impact on the existing public transportation structure, as the service presently provided by the SunLine Transit Agency has available capacity. Utility and Service System Impacts Solid waste is currently brought to the Edom Hill Transfer Station, which will accept and recycle or transfer waste from the City to other landfills, such as Lamb Canyon Landfill in Beaumont. The landfill has capacity to serve the proposed project, and impacts associated with landfill capacity are expected to be less than significant. In 2004, the City of Palm Springs diverted 60 percent of their solid waste, 10 percent more that the 50 percent diversion rate required by the State of California. Build out of the proposed project will result in the generation of approximately 200,000 gallons of wastewater per day. The sewer treatment plant currently processes approximately 6.5 million gallons per day, and has a 10.9 million gallon per day capacity. The proposed project will increase flows by 3% per day, but will not significantly impact plant capacity. Impacts associated with the increase in sanitary sewer flows are expected to be less than significant. Economic Impacts The proposed project is expected to result in a positive annual cash flow to the City. Economic impacts are therefore expected to be less than significant. 609750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 17 EFFECTS MITIGATABLE TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE Aesthetic Impacts The proposed project will result in potentially significant impacts associated with scenic vistas. The planned construction of tall structures will result in partial obstruction of mountain views in several locations surrounding the project site. The reconstruction of sidewalks could impact some elements of the 'Palm Springs Walk of Stars'. The level of development will be considerably more intense than that presently existing in the Downtown area. Findings: 1. Changes, alterations, and other measures have been made in or incorporated into the project which will mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. The EIR includes mitigation measures designed to reduce the potential impacts to scenic vistas to less than significant levels, as follows: a. Each application for Major Architectural Review or other discretionary permit involving structures within the Plan area shall include an analysis of the potential impacts associated with mountain views- b. Design of structures shall be sensitive to surrounding mountain vistas, and shall incorporate visually permeable materials, step-backs and setbacks, and stepped building frontages to the greatest extent possible. c. Building design for all structures along the perimeter of the Plan area, adjacent to existing buildings not in the Plan area, shall be set back from these buildings to the greatest extent possible to minimize indirect impacts associated with the visual character of the area. d. All lighting proposals for the Museum Market Plaza will be reviewed by the City for compliance with the requirements of both the Specific Plan and the lighting ordinance. Permitted lighting levels shall be consistent with the urban core location and compatible with the mixed uses of the project. e. All Developer proposals, including those for lighting and landscaping shall conform to the design guidelines set forth in the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan. f. Any elements of the 'Palm Springs Walk of Stars' that may be impacted during build out of the Specific Plan shall be carefully removed from the site, cleaned and safely stored. Once surrounding construction work is complete, the stars shall be reset into the sidewalk as close as possible to lOF750 I Resolution No. 22625 Page 18 their original location. Reinstated stars shall be refurbished as required to restore their original appearance. g. Signage shall be in compliance with the City's sign ordinance and the requirements of the Specific Plan. 2. In addition, the Specific Plan has been modified to reduce building heights to 60 feet, or 19 feet less than originally proposed. This change in the project will reduce impacts in addition to the mitigation measures provided in the EIR. Cultural Resources Impacts The project area has been extensively disturbed, and has limited potential for archaeological resources. However, the surrounding area, including the project site, has been identified as having the potential to harbor such resources. As development of the proposed project may result in the excavation of areas previously not impacted by significant excavations, the potential exists for buried resources to occur. A mitigation measure has been included in the EIR to assure that impacts to these resources are reduced to less than significant levels, if they are identified. Findings: 1. Changes, alterations, and other measures have been made in or incorporated into the project which will mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. The following mitigation measure is included in the EIR: a. In the event that inadvertent archaeological discovery is made on the project site during ground disturbing activities, all activity shall stop in the vicinity of the discovery, and the City and Tribal Historic Preservation Officer shall be contacted. If determined necessary by the Tribe and the City, a qualified archaeologist shall be hired by the contractor to assess the find. If the find is determined significant, a Treatment Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Tribe and City for approval. Geology and Soils Impacts Although no active faults or potentially active faults are found within the proposed project site, there are nearby active faults that could cause moderate to intense ground shaking, including the San Andreas, San Jacinto, Elsinore, and Banning faults. Although fault rupture is not anticipated, development of the project site would be subject to moderate to severe ground-shaking, resulting in risks to public safety and potentially significant damage to structures and other property. Shallow groundwater that can contribute to the occurrence of liquefaction is known to occur in the downtown area, immediately surrounding the Agua Caliente Springs. A 60M0 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 19 strong earthquake could cause liquefaction in this area, most likely expressed as "sand volcanoes" immediately surrounding the spring- Non-uniform or differential settlement can occur if the compressible soil section beneath the structure is variable, if the soil is heterogeneous, or if there are variable loads imposed across the footprint of the structure. If a structure is constructed such that it spans native soil and bedrock or native soil and a section of fill, differential settlements can be expected. Findings: 1. Changes, alterations, and other measures have been made in or incorporated into the project which will mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. The EIR includes mitigation measures designed to reduce the potential impacts to sails and geology to less than significant levels, as follows: a. The proposed project shall comply with the City's mandatory strengthening mitigation program. The strengthening mitigation standard chosen by Palm Springs for its URMs is the Modified 1987 Edition of the Seismic Safety Commission Model Ordinance (SSC, 2003). b. Temporary erosion-control measures shall be provided during the construction phase of the project site development, as required by local building codes and ordinances, as well as state and federal stormwater pollution regulations. In addition, permanent erosion control and clean water runoff measures are required for new developments, which are discussed further in the Hydrology and Water Quality, Sections III-F and III-G, of this document. Mitigation measures including planting stabilizing vegetation, covering soils with impervious surfaces, and installing wind fencing can significantly reduce wind related erosion. Additionally, the project applicant will be required to submit a Fugitive Dust Plan to the City prior to initiation of grading. These issues are also discussed in Section III-C, Air Quality. c. Construction plans for any portion of Block K shall be accompanied by a well monitoring report to assess the status and potential impact of the hot spring located at the Spa Hotel property. The report shall include any required improvements which will assure no impacts to either the building(s) on Block K, or the springs on the hotel property. d. The proposed project will be required to comply with the construction standards of the Palm Springs Fire Department, the Palm Springs Building Codes, and the seismic engineering requirements of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). As appropriate G0875G I Resolution No. 22625 Page 20 engineering design features and structural requirements are applied, any potential impacts would be mitigated. e. Subsequent to preparation of final development plans and specifications, but prior to grading and construction, the foundation plans shall be reviewed by the geological consultant and/or the City Building and Safety Department to verify compatibility with site geotechnical conditions and conformance with recommendations contained herein. f. Rough grading of the project site shall be performed under geological and engineering observation of the geological consultant and/or the City's Engineer. Rough grading includes, but is not limited to, grading of over- excavated cuts, fill placement, and excavation of temporary and permanent cut slopes. g. As determined appropriate by the City and consulting geologist, the geotechnical consultant and/or the City Building and Safety Department shall perform the following observations during site grading and construction of foundations to verify or modify, if necessary, conclusions and recommendations in the project's geotechnical report: • Observation of all grading operations. • Geologic observation of all cut slopes. • Observation of all key cuts and fills benching. • Observation of all retaining wall back cuts, during and following completion or excavation. • Observation of all surface and subsurface drainage systems. • Observation of backfill wedges and subdrains for retaining walls. • Observation of pre-moistening of subgrade soils and placement of sand cushion and vapor barrier beneath the slab. • Observation of all foundation excavations for the structure or retaining walls prior to placing forms and reinforcing steel. • Observation of compaction of all utility trench backfill. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts There are currently no hazardous materials on-site with the exception of the 3 percent asbestos identified in sprayed ceiling materials in the Desert Fashion Plaza. There is a very low probability that off-site contaminants have migrated to the subject property and impacted underlying soils or groundwater. Additionally, since there has never been any agriculture on-site, pesticides and/or herbicides are not expected to be present within underlying soils. The proposed project will allow for the demolition of existing buildings. Although hazardous materials were not identified within the Town and Country Center, ACM and lead paint are expected to occur. Demolition debris generated may include asphalt 608750 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 21 paving, dirt, concrete, flooring and ceiling materials, and other building materials. The demolition of buildings within the project site has the potential to release hazardous materials into the environment, without appropriate mitigation. Impacts from proposed development may include hazardous and toxic materials and wastes generated by commercial and resort establishments, and residences. Findings: 1. Changes, alterations, and other measures have been made in or incorporated into the project which will mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. The EIR includes mitigation measures designed to reduce the potential impacts to hazards and hazardous materials to less than significant levels, as follows: a. Prior to any demolition of any structures within the Town and Country Center, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment shall be completed. The study shall include an evaluation for Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM) and lead paint. Should either be identified, a remediation plan (Phase II) shall be prepared and submitted to the City for approval. All remediation shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City. b. All asbestos-related work, including demolition and renovation, shall be performed by a licensed Asbestos-abatement Contractor under the supervision of a certified Asbestos Consultant. Asbestos shall be removed and disposed of in compliance with notification and asbestos-removal procedures outlined in South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1403 to reduce asbestos-related health risks. c. During project construction and implementation, the handling, storage, transport, and disposal of all chemicals, including herbicides and pesticides, runoff, hazardous materials and waste used on, or at, the project site, shall be in accordance with the project's BMP/Integrated Waste Management Plan, other relevant regulatory plans, and applicable City, county, state, and federal regulations. d. Ongoing development within the Specific Plan area shall require continued coordination with the City of Palm Springs Fire Department to reduce the level of potential risk of exposure to hazardous and toxic material and waste, and facilitate fire department response in the event of a hazardous material or waste related emergency. 608750.I Resolution No. 22625 Page 22 e. Future development within the Specific Plan area shall be required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and regional permitting requirements for hazardous and toxic materials generation and handling, including but not limited to the following: i. If it is determined that hazardous wastes are, or will be, generated by any proposed operations, the wastes must be managed in accordance with the California Hazardous Waste Control Law (California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, chapter 6.5) and the Hazardous Waste Control Regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5). If so, the proposed facility shall obtain a United States Environmental Protection Agency Identification Number by contacting (800) 618-6942. ii. If hazardous wastes are (a) stored in tanks or containers for more than ninety days, (b) treated onsite, or (c) disposed of onsite, then a permit from the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) may be required. If so, the proposed facility shall contact DTSC at (818) 551-2171 to initiate pre-application discussions and determine the permitting process applicable to the facility. f. Hazardous material and waste storage within the proposed project shall be secured so as to minimize risk of upset in the event of ground shaking associated with earthquakes. 608750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 23 Hydrology and Water Resources Impacts A Water Supply Assessment was conducted for the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan as originally analyzed in the EIR, and quantifies the estimated water demand at build out. In consultation with DWA staff and other water use professionals, an estimate of water demand for the project as originally proposed was calculated using demand factors that closely reflect the proposed development. After accounting for return flows, which are applied only to the landscaping demand, this project-specific analysis resulted in an estimated water demand of 259.3 acre-feet per year (ac-ft/yr) or 0.23 million gallons per day (mgd). The proposed project contained approximately 380,977 square feet of land uses that currently receive water services, and generate an estimated water demand of 64.9 acre-feet per year or 0.06 mgd. This existing demand is contained within the estimated water demand for the DWA service area. Thus the net annual water demand for the project is estimated to be 194.3 acre-feet. The project as proposed for adoption is less intense than the project analyzed in the EIR and it is therefore projected that the estimated water demand from the project as proposed for adoption will be less than the project analyzed in the EIR. The impacts associated with build out of the Palm Springs General Plan were accounted for in the DWA 2005 Urban Water Management Plan, as part of the development projections used to set future water demand requirements. However, the General Plan and the UWMP did not address the increased land use intensity and related water demand increase associated with the proposed project. The Water Supply Assessment prepared for the project demonstrates DWA's ability to meet the additional water demand generated by the project. The proposed project is designed to keep water use to a minimum in order to support future conservation measures by incorporating the latest water conservation technologies. Recycled effluent could be used to replace groundwater currently being pumped for irrigation purposes, thereby reducing the demand on groundwater. Development within the Specific Plan will also be required to pay fees to DWA for the purpose of buying additional supplies of water for importation into the basin. Finally, changes proposed to the Specific Plan will reduce the impacts of the project on water resources further, by reducing domestic water demand. Impacts associated with water resources will be less than significant, with the imposition of mitigation measures. Findings: 1. Changes, alterations, and other measures have been made in or incorporated into the project which will mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. The EIR includes mitigation measures designed to reduce the potential impacts to water resources to less than significant levels, as follows: a. The following general landscape design principles shall be integrated into the project: G0875U.I Resolution No. 22625 Page 24 i. To the greatest extent practicable, native plant materials and other drought-tolerant plants shall be used in all non-turf areas of project landscaping. ii. Inorganic landscape materials, including boulders, cobble, gravels and crushed granitic materials, shall be used throughout the landscape to help naturalize the design, provide additional structure and pattern to the landscape, and eliminate the need for water in these areas. iii. large expanses of lawn and other water-intensive landscaped areas shall be limited to 50% of the park area or less, and consistent with the functional and aesthetic needs of the project, while providing soil stability and resistance to erosion. No other turf areas shall be allowed. b, landscaped areas shall utilize efficient irrigation systems that minimize runoff and evaporation, and maximize effective watering of plant roots. Landscape areas shall be outfitted with moisture detectors and ET controllers to maximize irrigation efficiency. Landscape plans shall be approved by the City and DWA prior to installation. c. The use of low-flush toilets and water-conserving shower heads and faucets shall be required in conformance with Section 17921.3 of the Health and Safety Code, Title 20, California Code of Regulations Section 1601(b), and applicable sections of Title 24 of the State Code. d. In accordance with the General Construction Activities Stormwater Permit issued by the California State Water Resources Control Board, the project proponent shall develop and implement a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) specifying best management practices (BMPs) to reduce construction-related stormwater runoff pollution to acceptable levels. e. Should recycled water be made available by Desert Water Agency at the site at the time of project development, the proposed project shall irrigate landscaping with recycled water. In addition, the Specific Plan has been modified to reduce the total permitted residential units and commercial square footage within the project site. This change in the project will reduce impacts in addition to the mitigation measures provided in the EIR. Land Use and Planning Impacts 608750 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 25 The proposed project has the potential to conflict with the City's adopted Redevelopment Plan. The proposed project occurs within the City's Merged Project Area I Redevelopment Plan boundary. The Redevelopment Agency is responsible for the provision of affordable housing both within the Plan boundary and throughout the City. Redevelopment law requires that 15% of all housing within a Redevelopment Plan boundary be affordable to low and very low income households. The proposed project allows up to 955 high-density residential units. Based on the 15% requirement described above, the proposed project will generate a need for up to 143 housing units affordable to low and very low income households. Changes proposed to the Specific Plan will reduce the impacts of the project on affordable housing, by reducing the number of units required to be produced in Merged Project Area I to 45. The Specific Plan does not provide any standards or requirements for the provision of affordable housing. If the units are not produced within the project, or at another location within Merger Project Area I, the City's Redevelopment Agency will be required to produce these units, or cause them to be produced, at another location. Findings: 1. Changes, alterations, and other measures have been made in or incorporated into the project which will mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. The EIR includes mitigation measures designed to reduce the potential impacts to land use and planning to less than significant levels, as follows: a. Prior to the issuance of any building permit on the project site, the applicant and City shall enter into an agreement which assures that 15% of the total residential units built within the project area are to be affordable to households in the low and very low income categories, consistent with State law. Alternatively, the agreement can provide the housing outside the Specific Plan boundary, if the alternate location is within Merged Project Area I, and is under the applicant's or City's control at the time the agreement is finalized. The agreement shall be recorded on all parcels proposed for residential development within the Specific Plan boundary. Noise Impacts Build out of the proposed project will result in short-term noise impacts associated with demolition of existing structures, grading and construction, as well as the transport of construction workers, materials and equipment to and from the site. Demolition, grading and construction noise impacts will be temporary and short-lived, and are not expected to impact community noise levels on a long-term basis. Prior to the implementation of the Specific Plan, there are no sensitive receptors within the immediate project site, although construction activities may have some impact on residents who live closest to the site boundaries. Phased development of the project may result in some sensitive receptors being introduced to the project area in the early or mid-phase, although residential development is generally expected to occur later in the development time 608750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 26 frame. At least some of the project's residential receptors could be temporarily subjected to noise impacts associated with the development of later phases. Stationary equipment, including the hum of fans and compressors, can be audible and intrusive. Proper and adequate shielding of mechanical equipment can reduce noise impacts from these sources to less than significant levels. Upon build out of the proposed project and the 2007 Palm Springs General Plan, sixteen of the roadway segments modeled in the EIR (26 percent) are projected to generate noise levels at a distance of 50 feet from the roadway center line that exceed 75 CNEL. Seven of the links evaluated (11 percent) will generate noise levels at 50 feet that are between 70 CNEL and 75 CNEL. Eight roadway segments (13 percent of the links modeled) are projected to generate noise levels at 50 feet that are between 65 CNEL, and 70 CNEL. Twenty-two links (35 percent of the links modeled) will generate noise levels at 50 feet that are between 60 CNEL and 65 CNEL. Noise levels at 50 feet from nine roadway segments will range be below 60 CNEL. Projected noise levels will result in a noise environment that can be conditionally compatible with the proposed hotel and residential development. Traffic noise along Palm Canyon will be the greatest noise source, with the 65 dBA CNEL. contour occurring 426 to 524 feet from the roadway center line. Certain portions of the proposed project, especially along Palm Canyon and Indian Canyon Drives may be significantly impacted by future noise levels unless less sensitive uses are planned or adequate noise mitigation is incorporated into individual project design. Findings: 1. Changes, alterations, and other measures have been made in or incorporated into the project which will mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. The EIR includes mitigation measures designed to reduce the potential impacts to the short and long term noise environment to less than significant levels, as follows: a. Construction activities that impact adjacent residential units shall comply with the hours of operation and noise levels identified in the City Noise Ordinance. Grading and construction activities on-site shall be restricted to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. on weekdays and the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. on Saturdays; no regular construction activities shall be allowed on Sundays or federal holidays to minimize the potential for noise impacts during more sensitive time periods, as specified by Palm Springs Municipal Code Section 8.04.220. b. Future on-site development shall comply with all relevant development standards and Palm Springs Municipal Code requirements to ensure that grading and construction activities and site operations do not create adverse noise impacts beyond the site boundaries as specified in the 609750 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 27 Noise Ordinance'. Construction activities shall incorporate feasible and practical techniques, which minimize the noise impacts on adjacent uses, such as the use of mufflers and intake silencers no less effective than originally equipped per City Policy NS3.11. c. The final layout and building design shall be evaluated by a qualified noise consultant to ensure that adequate noise attenuation features are incorporated in the project design to meet applicable City of Palm Springs noise standards as well as the California noise insulation standards. The applicant shall demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that all acoustic construction features required to assure acceptable interior noise levels (45 dBA CNEL or lower per City Policy NS1.6 and NS1.8) shall be incorporated in the project design, prior to the issuance of building permits. d. Parking structures and loading areas shall be designed to minimize noise impacts on-site and on adjacent uses, including the use of materials that mitigate sound transmission and configuration of interior spaces to minimize sound amplification and transmission per City Policy NS3.3. e. Future on-site development shall comply with all relevant noise policies set forth in the Noise Element of the Palm Springs 2007 General Plan to minimize operational noise impacts. f. Drivers of diesel-fueled commercial vehicles (with gross vehicular weight ratings greater than 10,000 pounds) shall be prohibited from idling the vehicle's primary engine for more than five minutes at any location on-site per Section 2485 of Chapter 10, Article 1, Division 3 of Title 13, California Code of Regulations. g. Exterior elevations shall incorporate design features and materials to soften noise-reflective building surfaces in higher noise street frontages. h. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, specifications shall be prepared that identify performance requirements regarding the attenuation of noise from construction vehicles and activities. The specifications shall include but not be limited to the following: i. A construction traffic routing plan shall be developed and submitted for approval that demonstrates, to the extent feasible, avoidance of congested routes and routes with adjacent noise sensitive receptors (particularly residential development). GOg]5��1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 28 ii. The general and sub-contractors shall comply with all local sound control and noise level rules, regulations and ordinances, which apply to any and all work performed pursuant to the contract. iii. Each internal combustion engine, used for any purpose on the job or related to the job, shall be equipped with a muffler of a type recommended by the manufacturer. No internal combustion engine shall be operated on the project without said muffler. iv. Construction activities shall incorporate feasible and practical techniques, which minimize the noise impacts on adjacent uses. V. Construction activities shall take place only between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. to minimize the potential for noise impacts during more sensitive time periods, as specified in the Palm Springs Noise Ordinance. Construction activities shall not be permitted between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. if the noise produced by such work is of such intensity or quality that it disturbs the peace and quiet of any other person of normal sensitivity, in conformance with Palm Springs Construction Site Regulations. vi. All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, should be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers or other appropriate sound attenuation device. vii. Stationary equipment should be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from noise sensitive receptors. viii. Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas should be located as far as practical from noise sensitive receptors. ix. Every effort shall be made to create the greatest distance between noise sources and sensitive receptors during construction activities. X. Project phasing will be encouraged where practicable to include initial development adjacent to residential areas, which then will shield them from noise generated during subsequent phases. A. To the greatest extent practicable, the noisiest construction operations shall be arranged to occur together in the construction program to avoid continuing periods of greater annoyance. xii. All construction equipment shall be in proper working order and maintained in a proper state of tune to reduce backfires. 61A750 I Resolution No. 22625 Page 29 xiii. Parking, refueling and servicing operations for all heavy equipment and on-site construction vehicles shall be located as far as practical from existing homes and other sensitive receptors. i. Any extension of construction hours shall require a permit to be issued by the City of Palm Springs as specified in the Palm Springs Noise Ordinance Public Services The Specific Plan proposes an intensive level of development and a mix of hotel, commercial, retail and restaurant uses that will maximize periods of active use and draw greater numbers of people downtown. In addition, the inclusion of residential uses is expected to introduce approximately 2,000 new residents to the area. Build out of the proposed project may therefore have a significant impact on the Palm Springs Fire Department by generating an increased demand for fire protection services in the City. It also has potential to reduce the City's ISO rating for Public Protection from a Class 3 to a Class 4 rating. Build-out of the Museum Market Plaza may also have a significant impact on the Palm Springs Police Department by generating an increased demand for surveillance and protection services in the City. FindinML 1. Changes, alterations, and other measures have been made in or incorporated into the project which will mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. The EIR includes mitigation measures designed to reduce the potential impacts to police and fire services to less than significant levels, as follows: a. The proposed project shall contribute its fair share to the siting and staffing of a new Downtown Fire Station, through participation in a Community Facilities District, participation in an other assessment district or Development Impact Fee, or other means, as determined in the Fire Department Master Plan. b. The proposed project shall participate in the Public Safety Community Facilities District (CFD) to offset impacts associated with increased population and activity in the project area. The CFD revenues may, at the City Council's option, be used to expand the Downtown police office into a Downtown Policing Facility. c. As part of the planning review process, the City Planning Department and the Palm Springs Police Chief shall evaluate project development plans from a 'defensible space' perspective. 608750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 30 Recreational Facilities Impacts At build out, the proposed project will increase population in the City by 2,000 people, who will have a need for parks. Development of the proposed project will result in the need for as much as 10 additional acres of parkland. The open space provided for the residents should be equivalent to the City's Quimby requirement, in order to assure that sufficient open space is provided by the project to meet General Plan policies. Findinqs: 1. Changes, alterations, and other measures have been made in or incorporated into the project which will mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. The EIR includes mitigation measures designed to reduce the potential impacts to parks to less than significant levels, as follows: a. The project proponents will participate in the city's parkland fee program/Quimby requirements, thereby off-setting any impacts associated with parks that may be generated by the employees, users and residents of the new development. The City will credit on-site open space against the requirement. Transportation and Traffic Impacts Based on the analysis of existing and future traffic conditions, the Specific Plan intersections in the planning area are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service during weekday and Saturday peak hours, with the incorporation of roadway and traffic signal improvements and other mitigation measures set forth in the EIR. In the peak season of the year 2030, all of the key intersections are projected to meet the City of Palm Springs minimum performance standard of LOS D in the midday and evening peak hours on typical weekdays without off-site mitigation. The levels of delay at the intersections evaluated with two-way stop control would be within the range considered acceptable by the City of Palm Springs on weekdays in the year 2030. In the peak season of the year 2030, all of the Specific Plan key intersections are projected to meet the City of Palm Springs minimum performance standard of LOS D in the midday peak hour on Saturdays without mitigation. With the proposed project, traffic signals would be warranted and required to meet the City minimum intersection performance standard at the proposed intersection of Palm Canyon Drive with Museum Way and at Indian Canyon Drive with Museum Way. In the year 2030 during Villagefest (Thursday evenings), the intersection of Belardo Road and Arenas Road is projected to operate at LOS F with all-way stop control. Although signalization would allow this intersection to operate at acceptable levels of service, urban signal warrants do not appear to be met by the projected peak hour traffic volumes at this intersection in the year 2030. Also during Villagefest in 2030, the intersection of Belardo Road and private Museum Way on-site is projected to operate at 608750 1 Resolution No 22625 Page 31 LOS F with all-way stop control with the proposed project. This intersection appears to require signalization during Villagefest to meet the City of Palm Springs minimum performance standard. The westbound (Amado Road) approach to the intersection of Belardo Road is also projected to operate at LOS F on Thursday evenings, with the existing two-way stop control. Signalization may be necessary at this intersection to maintain acceptable levels of minor-street control delay. The Specific Plan would adversely impact the General Plan street system within the study area by providing angled parking on the west side of Palm Canyon Drive. The sight distance for motorists backing out of the angled parking spaces would be very poor when large vehicles (minivans, SUVs, RVs or delivery trucks) were parked beside them, restricting the driver's view of approaching traffic until they backed a considerable distance into the travel lane to get a clear view around the adjacent vehicle. Approaching drivers would be forced to react suddenly to unexpected mid-block conflicts by braking to a stop to avoid collisions, with the additional concern of being rear-ended. A major thoroughfare (such as Palm Canyon Drive and Indian Canyon Drive) that has numerous vehicles backing out of angled parking spaces into the adjacent travel lane cannot safely accommodate high traffic volumes and would have substantially higher crash rates with angled parking than parallel parking. Changes to the Specific Plan include the elimination of all angled parking on Palm Canyon Drive, which will eliminate the impacts. Findings: 1. Changes, alterations, and other measures have been made in or incorporated into the project which will mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. The EIR includes mitigation measures designed to reduce the potential impacts to traffic and circulation to less than significant levels, as follows: a. The project proponent shall dedicate appropriate right-of-way, as needed, to accommodate the ultimate improvement of all General Plan public roadways within and adjacent to the project site to accommodate additional demand for exclusive right-turn lanes, bus stops and lanes, bicycle facilities or other improvements required to maintain a minimum operating LOS D at intersections. b. Master planned roadways shall be improved on and adjacent to the site in accordance with the approved design standards specified in the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan. c. Private roads shall be developed in accordance with the approved design standards specified in the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan or, where not provided in the Specific Plan, with City's published engineering standards for public streets, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 608750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 32 d. Where necessary and appropriate, the project proponent shall implement the Specific Plan and provide bikeways and associated facilities on and/or adjacent to the project site, The goal of this measure is to reconnect the existing recreational bike trails in the area known as the Las Palmas Loop, the Heritage Trail, the Citywide Loop, and the Downtown Loop that would be disconnected as a result of the removal of the segment eliminated by the vacation and abandonment of Belardo Road/Museum Drive proposed. The developer, may be required prior to approval of development plans, to provide right-of-way through land dedications to accommodate the City's network of trails and non- motorized routes. e. The project proponent shall provide off-street parking and loading facilities for the proposed development, as specified in the development standards and guidelines within the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan. Loading spaces shall be provided which meet the requirements of Section 93.07.01 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. The off-street parking layout shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. f. The project proponent shall provide accessible parking spaces and accessible parking aisles (96 inches wide and designated "Van Accessible") that are ADA compliant. If valet parking facilities are provided, an accessible passenger-loading zone shall also be provided on an accessible route to the entrance of the facility. If passenger- loading zones are provided on-site, then at least one passenger loading zone shall be ADA accessible. g. The project proponent shall provide accessible routes of travel (including compliant curb ramps, sidewalks, and other improvements) along all public streets and within all public spaces and common areas, in accordance with current ADA guidelines and standards. h. The project proponent shall contribute traffic impact mitigation fees, by participating in the Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. i. The following table summarizes the improvements needed at on-site and key intersections by the Year 2030 buildout period. Certain proposed mitigation measures set forth below and associated with addressing traffic conditions during Villagefest may be substituted with other measures or appropriate Conditions of Approval that adequately address these short-term impacts. The table also indicates the approximate project share of projected intersection traffic expected in 2030, and shall serve as the basis for assigning responsibility for improvements or appropriate levels of fee mitigation. Fair share assignments may be altered by the actual number of units and square footage proposed when actual project plans are submitted. cosro i Resolution No 22625 Page 33 Table 2 Required Intersection Improvements (2030) Intersection Improvement Project-Related Contribution To Future Traffic Growth WEEKDAY AND SATURDAY REQUIRED MITIGATION Palm Canyon Drive @ Museum Way Project Share of Traffic install a traffic signal Increase = 68.22% construct an eastbound through lane construct an eastbound right-turn lanea construct a westbound through lane - construct a westbound left-turn lanea Indian Canyon Drive @ Museum Way Project Share of Traffic - install a traffic signal Increase = 49.90% construct an eastbound left-turn lane Belardo Road @ Museum Way Project Share of Traffic - install an all-way stop Increase = 97.09% - construct a northbound approach lane - construct a southbound approach lane construct an eastbound approach lane construct a westbound approach lane Belardo Road @ Tahquitz Canyon Way Project Share of Traffic install a two-way stop, with STOP signs on Tahquitzlncrease = 90.59% Canyon Way stripe a northbound left-turn lane construct a southbound left-turn lane construct a southbound through/right-turn I ne - stripe an eastbound left-turn lane stripe a westbound left-turn lane ADDITIONAL MITIGATION ON VILLAGEFEST THURSDAY Belardo Road @ Amado Road Project Share of Traffic - install a traffic signal Increase = 59.32% Belardo Road @ Museum Way Project Share of Traffic - install a traffic signal Increase = 97.09% 6037501 Resolution No. 22625 Page 34 - add a northbound left-turn lanea - add a southbound left-turn lanea Belardo Road @ Arenas Road Project Share of Traffic - install a traffic signal Increase = 60.36% - add a northbound left-turn lanes add a southbound left-turn lanea j. The intersection approach lanes and traffic controls at the on-site and off-site key intersections shall be improved in a timely manner that preserves acceptable levels of service and consistent with the recommendations outlined in Figures 5-1 through 5-7 of the MMP Traffic Impact Study. k. To accommodate projected year 2030 traffic volumes at acceptable levels of service with I. Villagefest traffic and the closure of Palm Canyon Drive, three additional intersections will require signalization: (1) Belardo Road at Amado Road, (2) Belardo Road at Museum Way, and (3) Belardo Road at Arenas Road. m. To maintain the necessary roadway capacity while minimizing congestion, Belardo Road should be improved as a public "Collector" street. On-street parking should be restricted on the approaches to intersections to assure adequate intersection sight distances, particularly in the vicinity of Museum Way. n. Detailed street and parking plans proposing angled parking along Belardo Road shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. The subject facilities shall be designed to limit the impacts of angled parking on roadway capacity and the potential for increased accidents. o. Final subdivision maps and development plans identifying locations of structures, access drives, parking and other circulation components shall be submitted to and approved by the City for each implementing component of the Specific Plan. p. Adequate vehicle stacking capacity shall be provided at the access drives to all parking structures to assure that cars waiting for entry to the parking garages on-site do not obstruct the adjacent street, particularly in the peak travel periods. 609750.1 Resolution No 22625 Page 35 q. Clear unobstructed sight distances shall be maintained at the unsignalized site driveways, site access intersections, and internal intersections. All driveways with traffic exiting across public sidewalks shall have a clear sight triangle inside the property measuring 8 feet by 8 feet to allow driver visibility of pedestrians on the sidewalk. Screening fences or shrubbery shall not produce view obstructions at driveways or intersections. r. All off-street parking areas constructed on-site shall be adequately illuminated with properly shielded ground-level and mounted lighting fixtures that promote user safety, defensible space and security, as well as to minimize the potential for vehicle-pedestrian collisions. s. Proposed on-site loading facilities shall be designed in a manner that precludes trucks from backing into or out of the loading facilities from a public street, or to be required to use any public street for parking. All areas used by trucks shall be set at appropriate grades, properly drained, paved, and maintained. t. The project proponent shall coordinate with SunLine Transit Agency and the City to assure that adequate provisions are made for public transit facilities on-site. u. The project proponent shall contribute on a fair-share basis to the cost of circulation improvements required within the study area. Utilities and Service Systems Impacts Based on solid waste generation rates provided by the California Integrated Waste Management Board, residential development in the Specific Plan area will generate approximately 1,120 tons of solid waste per year. Commercial development will include commercial retail and office development, which is expected to generate approximately 960 tons of solid waste annually. The proposed Specific Plan will result in an increase in the volume of solid waste generated over time. In order to ensure the safe and cost- effective disposal of solid waste generated by development in the Specific Plan area, monitoring of waste management is necessary. Findings: 1. Changes, alterations, and other measures have been made in or incorporated into the project which will mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. The EIR includes mitigation measures designed to reduce the potential impacts to solid waste to less than significant levels, as follows: 608750 1 Resolution No, 22626 Page 36 a. The developer shall implement recycling programs for all components of the development project. E. SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Aesthetic Impacts Development of the proposed project will result in changes to the existing visual character of the project site and its surrounding. The planned construction of tall structures will result in partial obstruction of mountain views, particularly at Cahuilla Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way, and along portions of Palm Canyon Drive. Lykens Department Store, a Class I historically significant building (considered locally significant), occurs at the southeast corner of Andreas Road and Palm Canyon Drive, one lot north of the project site. It is an architecturally distinctive, historic building that makes an interesting visual contribution to the Downtown character. Although not directly affected by the Specific Plan build out, the building could be negatively impacted by the scale of the proposed new development. The intervening building, also not part of the proposed project, helps to separate the Lykens building from the proposed project. However, the mass and height of the structure to the south, extending up to 79 feet, will indirectly impact the Lykens building. The following mitigation measures are included in the EIR, and will reduce the impacts to scenic vistas and visual character to the extent possible- 1. Each application for Major Architectural Review or other discretionary permit involving structures within the Plan area shall include an analysis of the potential impacts associated with mountain views. 2. Design of structures shall be sensitive to surrounding mountain vistas, and shall incorporate visually permeable materials, step-backs and setbacks, and stepped building frontages to the greatest extent possible. 3. Building design for all structures along the perimeter of the Plan area, adjacent to existing buildings not in the Plan area, shall be set back from these buildings to the greatest extent possible to minimize indirect impacts associated with the visual character of the area. Since the preparation of the EIR, the City has modified the Specific Plan to reduce building heights to 60 feet, from the originally proposed 79 feet. While hotels may be allowed height in excess of 60 feet, if approved by the City Council, his remains a overall reduction and may reduce the impacts associated with scenic vistas and visual character to a greater extent than was analyzed in the EIR. The 60 foot building height, however, is still significantly greater than what currently occurs in the Downtown, and may still result in significant impacts to scenic vistas and visual character. M750,1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 37 Findings: 1. The City of Palm Springs hereby finds that impacts associated with scenic vistas, and the visual character of the Downtown constitute a significant unavoidable impact to aesthetics. Even with the implementation of mitigation measures, the build out of the proposed project will result in significant obstruction of mountain vistas, and impacts to the Lykens building. All reasonable and feasible mitigation measures that can substantially reduce impacts have been included in the EIR. No other feasible mitigation measures are available to further reduce impacts to scenic vistas and visual character. The City of Palm Springs finds that the remaining unavoidable significant effects are acceptable based on the inclusion of mitigation, the overall inability to mitigate the impacts despite inclusion of mitigation, the benefits associated with the proposed project, objectives established for the proposed project, and specific overriding considerations described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Air Quality Impacts The proposed project will generate significant impacts to air quality during the grading phase of construction. Although mitigation measures are included in the EIR, grading activity is expected to exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance for nitrogen oxides, and emit 118.33 pounds per day, rather than the prescribed 100 pounds per day. All other criteria pollutants will be emitted at levels lower than SCAQMD thresholds. After build out of the proposed project, two criteria pollutants, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen oxides, will exceed thresholds as established by SCAQMD. Furthermore, estimated nitrogen oxides currently exceed established thresholds. Although all reasonable mitigation measures have been incorporated in the measures provided below, emissions are expected to continue to exceed thresholds, thereby constituting unavoidable significant impacts to air quality. Build out of the proposed project is estimated to generate 40,658 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year, or 245,577 pounds per day of greenhouse gases. Existing land uses onsite contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, contributing an estimated GHG emissions of 14,923 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, or 90,136 pounds per day . The implementation of the proposed project will therefore increase GHG emissions, which is inconsistent with the requirements of SB32, to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels. The impacts of build out of the proposed project on GHG emissions will therefore be significant, even with the implementation of mitigation measures. The following mitigation measures are included in the EIR, and will reduce the impacts to air quality to the extent possible. GU875U.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 38 1. Grading and development permits shall be reviewed and conditioned to require the provision of all reasonably available methods and technologies to assure the minimal emissions of pollutants from the development, including proper vehicle maintenance and site watering schedules. 2. The City shall coordinate with the project developers to encourage the phasing and staging of development to assure the lowest construction-related pollutant emission levels practical. As part of the grading permit process, the applicant shall concurrently submit a dust control plan as required by SCAQMD in compliance with Rule 403. 3. In response to requirements of SCAQMD to monitor air quality impacts associated with fugitive dust from site disturbance and grading activities, all construction activities within the project boundary shall be subject to Rule 401 Visible Emissions, Rule 402 Nuisance, and Rule 403 Fugitive Dust'. 4. To reduce PM,o emissions, the developer shall implement the following the greatest extent practicable: • chemically treat soil at construction sites where activity will cease for at least four consecutive days; • pave on-site construction access roads as they are developed; extend paving at least 120 feet from roadway into construction site and clean roadways at the end of each working day; • restore vegetative ground cover as soon as construction activities have been completed; • chemically treat unpaved roads that carry 20 vehicle trips per day or more; • plant tree windbreaks utilizing non-invasive species on the windward perimeter of construction projects, where feasible; • all construction grading operations and earth moving operations shall cease when winds exceed 30 miles per hour; • prior to turf raking, implement effective PM10 control programs for turf over-seeding as outlined in the CV-SIP; • water site and equipment morning and evening and during all earth-moving operations; • spread soil binders on site, unpaved roads, and parking areas; • operate street-sweepers on paved roads adjacent to site; • re-establish ground cover on construction site through seeding and watering or other appropriate means; and • pave construction access roads, as appropriate. "Final 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan," prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District,August I,2003. 609750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 39 5. To minimize construction equipment emissions, the developer and contractors shall implement the following: • wash off trucks leaving the site; • require trucks to maintain two feet of freeboard; • properly tune and maintain construction equipment; and • use low sulfur fuel for construction equipment. 6. To reduce construction-related traffic congestion, the developer and contractors shall implement the following: • configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference; • provide a flag person to ensure safety at construction sites, as necessary; and • schedule operations affecting roadways for off-peak hours, as practical. 7. To minimize indirect source emissions, the developer shall: • install low-polluting and high-efficiency appliances; • install energy-efficient street lighting; and • landscape with native and other appropriate drought-resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 8. To minimize building energy requirements, the developer may also implement the following: • assure the thermal integrity of buildings and reduce the thermal load with automated time clocks or occupant sensors; • use efficient window glazing, wall insulation and ventilation methods; • introduce efficient heating and other appliances, such as water heaters, cooking equipment, refrigerators, furnaces and boiler units; • incorporate appropriate passive solar design, including solar heaters, and solar water heaters, to the greatest extent feasible; • use devices that minimize the combustion of fossil fuels; and • capture waste heat and re-employ this heat, where feasible. 9. Architecture and construction activities and materials shall utilize green buildings and alignment principles, as appropriate, including standards as defined in the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEER) Green Building standards for municipal buildings to the greatest extent possible. The use of solar panels is encouraged. Since the preparation of the EIR, the City has modified the Specific Plan to reduce residential density from 955 to 300 units, and commercial square footage from 400,000 to 300,000 square feet. This reduction may reduce the impacts associated with 609750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 40 operational emissions to a greater extent than was analyzed in the EIR. The construction activity, however, will be similar, insofar as the site area will be substantially the same as that studied in the EIR, and the GHG emissions will remain higher than 1990 levels. Findirim 1. The City of Palm Springs hereby finds that impacts from nitrogen oxide, carbon monoxide and GHG emissions constitute a significant unavoidable impact to air quality. Even with the implementation of mitigation measures, air quality impacts associated with carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides will exceed SCAQMD thresholds; and GHG emissions will be greater than those on the project site in 1990. All reasonable and feasible mitigation measures that can substantially reduce impacts have been included in the EIR. No other feasible mitigation measures are available to further reduce emissions. The City of Palm Springs finds that the remaining unavoidable significant effects are acceptable based on the inclusion of mitigation, the overall inability to mitigate the impacts despite inclusion of mitigation, the benefits associated with the proposed project, objectives established for the proposed project, and specific overriding considerations described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Cultural Resources Impacts The Specific Plan proposes the demolition of the Town and Country Center. In 2004, the building was determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources, with a local level of significance. The Town and Country Center meets the CEQA criteria "c" for listing, and can be considered a significant resource. The Center meets the definition of a historic resource as put forward in CEQA. Demolition of the Center would therefore be a significant impact. The EIR includes mitigation measures to preserve a record of the buildings according to federal standards, and to include displays within the proposed project which would commemorate the Center. However, as the Center has been determined a historically significant structure under CEQA, its demolition will result in an unavoidable significant impact which cannot be fully mitigated. The following mitigation measures are included in the EIR, and will reduce the impacts to historic resources to the extent possible. 1. On-site commemorative signs or displays recognizing the historic value of the two previously occurring historic sites to the west of Palm Canyon Drive shall be incorporated into the proposed project. 2. A comprehensive documentation program shall be completed for the Town and Country Center prior to any building altering activities on the property. The COS)SO,I Resolution No. 22625 Page 41 documentation shall be consistent with Historic American Building Survey (HABS) procedures, and shall include detailed architectural description, photographic records, scaled mapping and completion of a historic record of the property. The resulting records shall be curated at the City of Palm Springs and the Eastern Information Center. Commemorative signage and displays shall be incorporated into the proposed project. The following mitigation measure is added to ensure that the Town and Country Center is not demolished until such time as construction of commercial retail improvements and the benefits anticipated from such development are reasonably assured, 1. No permit for the demolition or substantial alteration of any portion of the Town and Country Center will be issued until (a) all discretionary entitlements consistent with the Specific Plan have been approved for the renovation or redevelopment of the existing Desert Fashion Plaza; (b) building permits in furtherance of such renovation or redevelopment have been issued; and (c) substantial work consistent with such building permits have commenced on the existing Desert Fashion Plaza. Since the preparation of the EIR, the City has modified the Specific Plan to consider the demolition of the Town and Country Center based on the quality and value of projects which may be proposed for the site in the future. Should the Center remain, the impacts associated with its demolition would be eliminated. However, since the demolition of the Center is not precluded, potential impacts associated with the Town and Country Center remain significant and unavoidable. Findings: 1. The City of Palm Springs hereby finds that the proposed project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts to historic resources. No feasible mitigation measures are available to mitigate this impact, insofar as demolition of the Town and Country Center will eliminate a CEQA qualified historic structure. The City of Palm Springs finds that these unavoidable significant impacts are acceptable based on the overall inability to mitigate the impacts despite inclusion of mitigation, the benefits associated with the proposed project, objectives established for the proposed project, and specific overriding considerations described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. F. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES The Environmental Impact Report considered alternatives to the proposed project which would reduce impacts of the proposed project, while still meeting some or most of the project objectives, as described in Section A. As required by CEQA, these 609720 1 Resolution No. 22626 Page 42 alternatives constituted a reasonable range of potential options necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives were the No Project Alternative, the Preservation of the Town and Country Center Alternative, Less Intense Alternative A, and Less Intense Alternative B. The EIR identified the No Project Alternative as "environmentally superior" to the Preferred Alternative. Therefore, as set forth in Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared to substantiate the City's decision to reject the project alternatives because of the balance of impacts to benefits afforded by the proposed project. A. No Project Alternative 1. Description of Alternative: Under this alternative, the Desert Fashion Plaza would be refurbished and would reopen in its current configuration. The alternative would also maintain the Town & Country Center and adjacent buildings, and maintain the parking lot at Mercado Plaza. The only construction to occur would be the build out of the southwest corner of Cahuilla Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way (Block L) with 45 hotel rooms, as could be allowed under the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. No change would occur in the Mercado parking lot. The build out of this alternative would result in. a. Desert Fashion Plaza: 41,600 square feet of restaurant space 288,400 square feet of retail commercial space b. Town & Country Center: 15,000 square feet of restaurant space 33,600 square feet of retail commercial space 2,350 square feet of office space c. Tahquitz Canyon/Cahuilla: 45 hotel rooms 2. Comparison of Effects: Aesthetics and Visual Resources: This alternative will potentially have less impact on the visual resources of the area than the proposed project, with the exception of the vista from Cahuilla Road to the northwest. The No Project Alternative would preserve the existing built form and maintain the view corridors and vistas that presently characterize Downtown Palm Springs. In accordance with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, this alternative would allow construction of one new hotel on a vacant site at the corner of Cahuilla Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way. Air Quality. Build out of the No Project Alternative will result in the daily exceedance of carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and ROG thresholds. All other criteria pollutants are estimated to be less than the established thresholds. This alternative would therefore result in ROG impacts which would not occur with the proposed project. At build out of the No Project Alternative the annual greenhouse gas emissions are projected to be an estimated 32,267 metric tons of carbon dioxide, which is approximately 20% less than the emissions projected for the Proposed Project alternative. 609750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 43 Cultural Resources: The No Project Alternative would result in reuse of the Town and Country Center, which would therefore have less impact on historic resources than the proposed project, which results in the demolition of the Town and Country Center. Geology and Soils: This alternative would result in no residential units and only about 7 percent of the hotel rooms proposed in the proposed project. The potential impact to people and structures from a significant geotechnical event, therefore, would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. Hazardous and Toxic Materials: The No Project Alternative has the least hazardous materials impacts of all the alternatives, since it plans for no residential units and only about 7% of the hotel rooms when compared to the proposed project. This alternative reduces total square footage by approximately 80% of the total square footage planned for the proposed project, thereby reducing the areas where hazardous materials could be stored. Hydrology: The No Project Alternative results in the requirement of fewer improvements for both on-site stormwater facilities and the amount of overall improvements that may be susceptible to flooding. Because of the reduced scope of this alternative, existing improvements are expected to be relatively capable of ensuring adequate control of stormwater runoff from the project site into the storm drain system. Water quality and Resources: Water demand for the No Project Alternative would be approximately 24 acre-feet per year or 0.02 mgd. Water demand for the No Project Alternative represents 12% of the estimated water demand for the proposed project. Thus, the No Project Alternative would require less water compared to the proposed project. Land Use and Planning: This alternative would not require the preparation or adoption of a Specific Plan, as existing structures, whether conforming to current City Zoning standards or not, would be allowed to remain. This alternative would be consistent with the General Plan and Zoning land use designations currently applied to the properties within the project area. This alternative, however, would not implement most of the goals and strategies of the Downtown Urban Design Plan (DUDP) pertaining to downtown revitalization. This alternative, however, could result in the re-use of the Town and Country Center, which is not a goal of the Plan. The Town and Country Center presents significant economic challenges for re-use in that it does not meet the general market requirements for retail buildings and it is not effectively integrated into the rest of downtown (1). In addition, the Town and Country likely contains significant hazardous materials that will require remediation as part of any renovation or re-use plan (2). Lastly, it is not anticipated that rental rates will be sufficient to cover the costs of MR750 I Resolution No. 22625 Page 44 renovation (3). The No Project Alternative, therefore, could be incompatible with the Downtown Urban Design Plan. Noise: Potential construction noise impacts resulting from the limited new development under this alternative would be considerably less than those generated by the proposed project, because of the significant reduction in construction activity. In 2030, ambient traffic noise levels would be marginally lower, and range from a low of 45.0 CNEL to a high of 75.6 CNEL, in comparison to those of the proposed project, which range from a low of 45.0 CNEL to a high of 75.7 CNEL. Population and Housing: There would be no growth in housing units under this alternative, as no residential units would be created. This alternative would generate new jobs in the City, but to a lesser degree than the Proposed Project, since the intensity and type of development would be reduced. Public Services and Facilities: This alternative will draw fewer people into the project area and result in little increased demand for Fire Protection Services. In consequence, impacts generated by the No Project Alternative will be less than significant, when compared to those of the proposed project, and will not require mitigation. This alternative does not significantly increase existing levels of development, and will therefore result in little increased demand for Police Protection Services. In consequence, impacts generated by the No Project Alternative will be less than significant, and will not require mitigation. The No Project Alternative would not have any impact on the City's schools, as no new residents would be introduced to the project site. Recreational Resources: The No Project Alternative would not require additional parks or recreation because of the lack of residential uses in the area, but it would also not provide the central plaza proposed in the Downtown Urban Design Plan (DUDP). Transportation and Traffic: This alternative would preserve the existing roadway network, while allowing new development to occur on one vacant portion of the project site located at the southwest corner of Cahuilla Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way. This alternative would not include an east-west connection from Indian Canyon to the Museum. Potential traffic impacts will be equivalent to those associated with existing development assumed to be in a fully occupied state, but would be reduced when compared to the proposed project. Utilities and Service Systems: The No Project Alternative will generate approximately one half of the total solid waste that will be generated by the proposed project. This alternative will result in the generation of 79,367 gallons of wastewater per day, representing the lowest generation rates of any of the alternatives. 609750.1 Resolution No 22625 Page 45 Economics: Under this alternative, the project area would generate $928,782 in revenues to the City's General and Restricted funds, and $1.5 million to the City and RDA. This alternative's low cash flow is associated with the lack of residents at the project site, and the low generation of transient occupancy tax revenue. 3. Findings: The City of Palm Springs compared the relative impacts and benefits of the proposed project and the No Project Alternative and did not select this Alternative. However, monitored mitigation measures and features incorporated into the proposed project, as described in Section C of these Findings, will substantially reduce the environmental effects of the proposed project. 4. Facts: The objectives of the project, as well the policies and programs of the General Plan, and the goals of the Downtown Urban Design Plan would not be implemented with this alternative, including without limitation failure to achieve the connectivity goals of the Project to connect the Museum to Indian Canyon and Section 14 (4). This alternative perpetuates the existing vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow that has proven to be ineffective in providing access to the Desert Fashion Plaza and has contributed to its inability to be reasonably marketed (5). Although this alternative would reduce impacts to a greater degree than the other alternatives, the benefits of this alternative would not be comparable. This alternative would not generate the levels of employment of the other alternatives, and would not reintroduce residential units into the Downtown. Notes:(1) Reports of Michael Scacella (Capital Realty Analysts), Frank Schroeder (D.W. Johnston Construction, Inc., and Michael Kassinger (Coldwell Banker) submitted to Council for hearing on historical designation of Town and Country on June 24, 2009. (2) Draft EIR, Page V-17 (3) Reports of Michael Scacella (Capital Realty Analysts), Frank Schroeder (D.W. Johnston Construction, Inc., and Michael Kassinger (Coldwell Banker) submitted to Council for hearing on historical designation of Town and Country on June 24, 2009. (4) Draft EIR, Page V-57; Testimony of Emily Hemphill to City Council on November 18, 2009. (5) Testimony of Emily Hemphill to City Council on November 18, 2009. B. Preservation of the Town and Country Center Alternative 1. Description of Alternative: Under this alternative, all new development between Palm Canyon and Indian Canyon Drives would be eliminated. The Town & Country Center would be rehabilitated, with the exception of Building C, which would be eliminated. The total land use allocation would be as follows: GU875U� Resolution No. 22625 Page 46 a. Desert Fashion Plaza Site: 900 high density residential units 380,000 square feet of retail commercial space 365 hotel rooms b. Town & Country Center: 15,000 square feet of restaurant space 17,000 square feet of retail commercial space 2,350 square feet of office space c. Tahquitz Canyon/Cahuilla: 15,000 square feet of retail commercial space 55 hotel rooms d. Mercado Parking Lot: Parking Structure 2. Comparison of Effects- Aesthetics and Visual Resources: This alternative generally corresponds to the proposed project in terms of the redevelopment of lands on the west side of North Palm Canyon Drive. However, it would preserve and adaptively re-use the Town and Country Center. The potential for impeded views and increased light and glare resulting from this alternative will correspond to those of the proposed project. This alternative will also introduce similar numbers of sensitive receptors to the project area. However, by preserving and rehabilitating the Town and Country Center, this alternative would result in a superior alternative for the visual character of that Center. Air Quality: The Preservation of the Town and County Center Alternative will result in three of the criteria pollutants exceeding the SCAQMD threshold of significance. Carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and reactive organic gases daily emissions will be greater than the established thresholds, which would result in significant and unavoidable impacts, comparable to the impacts associated with the proposed project. The Preservation of the Town and Country Center Alternative would emit slightly greater quantities of greenhouse gases compared to the proposed project. This is primarily due to vehicular emissions associated with this alternative. Cultural Resources: The redevelopment of the Town and Country Center would preserve and restore its architectural and historic character, as the buildings would be restored to their original appearance. This alternative would, however, result in the demolition of the southern building, formerly the Bank of America, and would therefore have some impact on historic resources, although to a lesser degree than the proposed project. Geology and Soils: Impacts under this alternative will be similar to the proposed project in terms of the planned number of high density residential units and commercial development. Its planned 365 hotel rooms are fewer by about 40% compared to the proposed project. The magnitude of the impact of a large earthquake on the site could be similarly high in terms of injury and property damage, compared to the proposed project. Under this alternative, the Town and 608750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 47 Country Center would be seismically retrofitted, and would therefore not pose any greater risk than newer buildings on the site.. Hazardous and Toxic Materials: Renovation of the Town and Country Center would require abatement of asbestos and lead materials, to a similar degree as demolition would under the proposed project. Hazardous materials and waste impacts will be similar to those of the proposed project, since the residential and commercial intensities will be very similar to the proposed project. Hydrology: This alternative includes substantial development of residential and hotel units, which has the potential to put a greater number of people and structures at risk in the event of a flood event. Compliance with specific design criteria for retention basins and storm drain facilities, and the direct discharge of runoff would result in less-than-significant impacts, as would the proposed project. Water Quality and Resources: The Town and Country Alternative would generate domestic water demand of 186.5 acre-feet per year, a reduction of less than 4% when compared to the proposed project. This alternative would have similar impacts to water resources as compared to the proposed project. Impacts are expected to be individually insignificant, but will contribute to the cumulative overdraft conditions. Land Use and Planning: The impacts associated with land use and planning under the Preservation of the Town and Country Center Alternative would be reduced under this alternative. This alternative implements the land use designations assigned to the properties under the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. It is also compatible with the DUDP, insofar as it brings residential development to the Downtown Core, improves the retail commercial environment, and preserves and re-uses historic structures. The Town and Country Center presents significant economic challenges for re-use in that it does not meet the general market requirements for retail buildings and it is not effectively integrated into the rest of downtown (1). In addition, the Town and Country likely contains significant hazardous materials that will require remediation as part of any renovation or re-use plan (2). Lastly, it is not anticipated that rental rates will be sufficient to cover the costs of renovation (3). This alternative also implements a pedestrian, but not a vehicular connection to Section 14 and the Convention Center. Noise: This alternative results in less demolition, less reconstruction and a somewhat less intensive level of development than the Proposed Project. In 2030, ambient traffic noise levels would range from a low of 45.0 CNPL to a high of 75.7 CNEL, equivalent to those of the proposed project. Population and Housing: This alternative would result in the same number of potential residential units, so population growth would be equivalent to the 00V so.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 48 proposed project. This alternative would also allow persons employed within the project to live within the project. The Town and Country Center, which would be refurbished and re-used for retail and office commercial development, would generate new employment, as would development on the balance of the site. Public Services and Facilities. Although levels of demand for the services of the Palm Springs Fire Department will increase in proportion to the intensity of the new development, the impacts generated by this alternative are expected to be somewhat less than those of the Proposed Project. This alternative draws somewhat fewer people into the project area, because of the reduced development at the Town and Country Center. The impacts generated by this alternative are expected to be somewhat lower than those of the proposed project, but would require mitigation to reduce them to less than significant levels. This alternative introduces residential uses to the area and will result in a level of residential development similar to that of the proposed project. In consequence, the school impacts resulting from this alternative are expected to be equivalent to those of the proposed project. Recreational Resources: The potential impact on recreational facilities resulting from this alternative would be similar to the proposed project, and this alternative would include the common recreational amenities required of the proposed project, and implement the central plaza envisioned in the DUDP, while preserving the Town and Country Center. Transportation and Traffic: Circulation and level of development are generally equivalent to the proposed project. However, this alternative does not provide vehicular connection between Palm Canyon Drive and Indian Canyon Drive. There would also be no change to Andreas Road. This alternative will generate traffic impacts slightly higher than the proposed project. Utilities and Service Systems: This alternative is estimated to generate 3,001 tons of solid waste annually, a 3% increase over the proposed project. This alternative will generate approximately 166,496 gallons per day of wastewater, or 4% less than the proposed project. Economics: This alternative will result in both residential and commercial development. The City's General Fund and Restricted funds would see an annual cash flow at build out of$939,219, without onetime fees; and a total cash flow to the City and RDA of $4.3 million, without one-time fees. 3. Findings — The City of Palm Springs compared the relative impacts and benefits of the proposed project and the Preservation of the Town and Country Center Alternative, and did not select this Alternative. Nonetheless, the environmental 608750 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 49 effects of the proposed project will be substantially reduced by the monitored mitigation measures and features incorporated into the proposed project, as described in Section C of these Findings. 4. Facts — As outlined above, and confirmed in the EIR, the Preservation of the Town and Country Center Alternative does not fully meet the project objectives,, including without limitation failure to achieve the connectivity goals of the Project to connect the Museum to Indian Canyon and Section 14 (4). This alternative perpetuates the existing vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow that has proven to be ineffective in providing access to the Desert Fashion Plaza and has contributed to its inability to be reasonably marketed (5). In addition, the alternative does not meet many of the benefits associated with the proposed project, as outlined in these Findings. For these reasons, the Preservation of the Town and Country Center Alternative was rejected. Notes:(1) Reports of Michael Scacella (Capital Realty Analysts), Frank Schroeder (D.W. Johnston Construction, Inc., and Michael Kassinger (Coldwell Banker) submitted to Council for hearing on historical designation of Town and Country on June 24, 2009. (2) Draft FIR, Page V 17 (3) Reports of Michael Scacella (Capital Realty Analysts), Frank Schroeder (D.W. Johnston Construction, Inc., and Michael Kassinger (Coldwell Banker) submitted to Council for hearing on historical designation of Town and Country on June 24, 2009. (4) Draft FIR, Page V-57: Testimony of Emily Hemphill to City Council on November 18, 2009. (5) Testimony of Emily Hemphill to City Council on November 18, 2009. C, Less Intense Alternative A 1. Description of Alternative_ Under this alternative, a central park consisting of approximately 55,000 square feet would occur in the center of what is now Desert Fashion Plaza. Museum Way would not be extended from the Desert Art Museum to Indian Canyon Drive. Belardo would be extended through the site, but would be curvilinear rather than rectilinear. The northern portion of the Town and Country Center would remain, but the Bank of America building and buildings immediately south and east of the Bank of America building would be replaced with retail commercial development and pedestrian access. Building heights would extend to 57 feet along Museum Drive (west side of project) and Tahquitz Canyon Way, west of Belardo Road. Building heights on Palm Canyon Drive would range from 17 to 34 feet. Building height adjacent to the existing Hyatt hotel would be 34 feet, for a cinema. This alternative would result in the following development: a. Retail Shops 144,000 square feet b. Office 40,000 c. Supermarket 42,500 square feet 609750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 50 d. Cinema 68,000 square feet e. High Density Residential 120 units 2. Comparison of Effects: Aesthetics and Visual Resources: Tallest buildings are located in the western parts of the site and do not exceed 57 feet in height. Structures fronting Palm Canyon Drive would range from 17 to 34 feet in height, and a park would be provided in the center of the development. This alternative would preserve the Town and Country Center, and provide pedestrian access through that portion of the site to Indian Canyon Drive. Levels of light and glare resulting from Less Intensive Alternative A would be proportionate to the level of development and therefore have a somewhat lesser impact than those resulting from the Proposed Project. The view corridor created by the new street would not occur. Under this alternative, the view from Indian Canyon Drive would remain as it currently occurs, with the ridges of the San Jacinto range visible above the Town and Country Center structure. Air Quality: Under this alternative, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and reactive organic gases emissions exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Comparatively, the proposed project also exceeds these three established thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants. Therefore, Less Intense Alternative A would have similar impacts to air quality compared to the proposed project, and would result in significant and unavoidable impacts. This alternative represents approximately 25% less greenhouse gas emissions at build out than the proposed project. Cultural Resources: Under this alternative, the buildings in the Town and Country Center will not be rehabilitated and actively incorporated in to the project. This alternative would therefore not have the beneficial impact of restoration of the structures in the Center associated with the Preservation of the Town and Country Center alternative. This alternative has less impact on cultural resources than the proposed project, which results in demolition of the Town and Country Center. Geology and Soils: Under the Less Intense Alternative A, there would be no hotel, an 87% reduction in high density residential units, and about 25% less commercial square footage, which will result in less population and fewer structures on-site than the proposed project. Therefore, geotechnical and seismic impacts will affect this alternative to a lesser degree than the proposed project. Hazardous and Toxic Materials: This alternative would preserve the Town and Country Center, but without renovation, which would result in potential hazardous materials remaining in place on the site. Under this alternative, additional mitigation would be required to abate lead and asbestos risks within the Town and Country Center. The residential land uses planned for this alternative are GOS750 I Resolution No. 22625 Page 51 87% less than those planned for the proposed project, and 26% less commercial space than that of the proposed project. Therefore, hazardous material impacts will affect the Less Intense Alternative A to a lesser degree than those of the proposed project. Hydrology: Less Intense Alternative A would allow for slightly greater landscaped areas and impervious surfaces on the project site when compared to the proposed project. As with each of the alternatives, this alternative would install new storm drain facilities and incorporate existing regulations. This alternative would have less-than-significant hydrology impacts. Water Quality and Resources. This alternative would decrease water demand by 2 acre-feet per year. This alternative represents the lowest water demand of all alternatives. Land Use and Planning. Under this alternative, land uses would be consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and development standards would likely be consistent as well, eliminating the need for a Specific Plan. This alternative would be more consistent with the General Plan, insofar as height limits would not be exceeded, a public plaza would be provided, and a pedestrian, but not a vehicular connection would be provided to Section 14. This alternative would not be consistent with the adaptive reuse of the Town and Country Center, insofar as it would remain in its current condition. The alternative would also bring mixed-use residential development into the Downtown Core, to a lesser degree than the proposed project. Noise: Potential traffic noise impacts resulting from Less Intense Alternative A in 2030 would range from a low of 52.5 CNEL to a high of 75.5 CNEL, in comparison to those of the proposed project, which range from a low of 45.0 CNEL to a high of 75.7 CNEL. Population and Housing: Less Intense Alternative A would accommodate 12.6°% of the residential units planned for the proposed project, and would not provide housing for employees within the project. This alternative would also generate 44% of the total jobs provided under the proposed project. This alternative would therefore result in the smallest job creation of all the alternatives. Public Services and Facilities: Although levels of demand for the services of the Palm Springs Fire Department will increase in proportion to the intensity of the new development proposed under this alternative, the impacts generated by this alternative are expected to be somewhat less than those of the proposed project. Under this alternative, a considerably less intensive level of overall development will draw fewer people into the project area. Although levels of demand for the services of the Palm Springs Police Department may increase slightly as a result of the new development, the impacts generated by this alternative are expected G087i0 I Resolution No. 22625 Page 52 to be considerably less than those of the proposed project. This alternative may not require mitigation measures, as impacts may remain less than significant. The school impacts resulting from this alternative are expected to be considerably less than those resulting from the proposed project, with a total student generation of only 33 students. Recreational Resources: This alternative will result in fewer residents in the project area, and provide somewhat more recreational open space. The potential impact on of this alternative on recreational resources will therefore be less than that of the proposed project. Transportation and Traffic. This alternative proposes a circulation pattern and a level of development that differ considerably from those of the proposed project. Implementation of Less Intense Alternative A will draw fewer people into the project area and the potential traffic impacts will therefore be less than those of the proposed project. Utilities and Service Systems: Less Intense Alternative A will generate an estimated total solid waste of 1,487 tons annually, a 49% decrease compared to the proposed project. Less Intense Alternative A will result in the generation of 56,165 gallons per day of wastewater, or 68% less effluent generation than the proposed project. Economics: Under this alternative, the City's General Fund and Restricted funds would see an annual cash flow at build out of $566,313, without one-time fees; and a total cash flow to the City and RDA of $1.3 million, without one-time fees. The relative low cash flow in this alternative is due to the limited amount of development, and the lack of hotel rooms, eliminating transient occupancy tax revenues. 3. Findings — As discussed above, and confirmed in the EIR, the City of Palm Springs compared the relative impacts and benefits of the proposed project and Less Intense Alternative A, and did not select this Alternative. The Preferred Alternative, as described in Section C of these Findings, incorporates monitored mitigation measures and other features that will substantially reduce the environmental effects of the proposed project. 4. Facts —Less Intense Alternative A does not fully meet the project objectives of the proposed project, the General flan, or the Downtown Urban Design Plan, including without limitation its failure to provide the level of commercial and/or residential uses that would assure the success of the Proejct or adequately encourage a pedestrian lifestyle. This alternative also does not meet many of the benefits associated with the proposed project, as outlined in Section A of these Findings. Therefore, the City rejected Less Intense Alternative A. 603750 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 53 D. Less Intense Alternative B 1. Description of Alternative: Under this alternative, the intensities of development within the project area would be reduced, but the areas to be redeveloped would be consistent with the Proposed Project, and the Town and Country Center would not be preserved. This alternative would construct Museum Way from the Desert Art Museum to Indian Canyon Drive, and extend Belardo Road through the project site in a rectilinear fashion. Under this alternative, building heights would not exceed 68 feet, and the project-wide building height average would remain 60 feet. The Plaza located in the center of the project would remain, and would still be constructed with two restaurants. The Mercado parking lot would be occupied by a parking structure under this alternative. This alternative would result in the following development: a. 300,000 square feet of retail commercial space b. 255 hotel rooms c. 765 dwelling units This alternative is the closest in intensity to the changes which have been integrated into the Specific Plan. The impacts associated with these changes will not be equivalent to the proposed project, however, because the type of residential and hotel development proposed varies from the amended Specific Plan, which does provide specific limits on density and intensity of uses„ as well as the elimination of Blocks J & L. 2. Comparison of Effects: Aesthetics and Visual Resources: This alternative proposes building heights at a maximum of 68 feet, and reduced land use intensities. The potential for impeded views and increased light and glare resulting from this alternative will be generally consistent with those of the proposed project. Somewhat fewer numbers of sensitive receptors will be introduced to the project area. This alternative also proposes the demolition of the Town and Country Center. The impacts on visual resources resulting from this alternative are expected to be similar to those of the proposed project, and will result in significant and unavoidable aesthetic impacts. Air Quality: Build out of Less Intense Alternative B would result in the same three criteria pollutants expected to be exceeded in the proposed project: carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and reactive organic gases. Air quality emissions for this alternative would be slightly less compared to the proposed project, but would still result in significant and unavoidable impacts. Less Intense Alternative B would have annual carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of 33,065 metric tons per year, or 199,715 pounds per day. Emissions of greenhouse gases for this alternative represent approximately 80% of the expected emissions, or a 20% reduction in emissions over the proposed project as evaluated in the EIR. 606750 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 54 Cultural Resources: This alternative proposes a pattern of development similar to that of the Proposed Project, but with lower densities, which will result in equivalent impacts to those of the proposed project, since the Town and Country Center would be removed. The Lykens Building will also be impacted in a manner similar to the proposed project. Impacts associated with cultural resources would be significant and unavoidable. Geology and Soils: Less Intense Alternative B has 20% fewer high-density residential units, about 60% fewer hotel rooms, and approximately 25% less commercial space than the proposed project. This alternative would expose slightly fewer individuals and structures to potential earthquake hazards compared to the Proposed Project. Hazardous and Toxic Materials: Impacts associated with hazardous materials removal would be equivalent to those of the proposed project under this alternative, because both the Desert Fashion Plaza and the Town and Country Center would be demolished. Less Intense Alternative B includes 80% of the high-density residential units, approximately 40% of the hotel rooms, and 75% of the total commercial space planned for the proposed project. The hazardous waste impacts of this alternative would therefore be comparable to those of the proposed project. Hydrology: Less Intense Alternative B includes substantial development of residential and hotel units, which has the potential to put a greater number of people and structures at risk in the event of a flood event. Compliance with specific design criteria for retention basins, storm drains and the direct discharge of runoff would result in less-than-significant impacts, consistent with the proposed project. Water Quality and Resources: This alternative would generate an estimated net water demand of 122 acre-feet per year, which is approximately 63% of the estimated water demand for the proposed project. Impacts are expected to be individually insignificant, but will contribute to the cumulative overdraft conditions that currently exist. Land Use and Planning: Under this alternative, land use and planning impacts would be reduced when compared to the Proposed Project, but would be greater than the impacts associated with Less Intense Alternative A. This alternative would be consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance in terms of land uses allowed in the project area, This alternative would still require a Specific Plan, to address building height. The Town and Country Center would be demolished, which is not consistent with the concepts of the DUDP. The alternative would bring mixed use residential land uses in the Downtown Core, and would create the pedestrian and vehicular connection, and mid-block view corridor included in the DUDP. cus�sn i Resolution No, 22625 Page 55 Noise: Potential traffic noise impacts resulting from Less Intense Alternative B would range from a low of 45.0 CNEL to a high of 75.6 CNEL, in comparison to those of the Proposed Project, which range from a low of 46.0 CNEL to a high of 75.7 CNEL. The overall numbers of people drawn into the area under this alternative will generally correspond to the numbers under the proposed project and operational noise impacts are also expected to be similar. Population and Housing: Under this alternative, housing would generate 79% (1,598 persons) of the population growth expected for the proposed project. This alternative would allow those employed within the project area to live within the project area. Under this alternative 1,383 jobs, or 60% of the jobs resulting from the proposed project would be created. The reduction is primarily due to the significant decrease in hotel rooms, which are a relatively large employment generator. Public Services and Facilities: The overall numbers of people drawn into the area under this alternative will be generally equivalent to the numbers generated by the proposed project and levels of demand for the services of the Palm Springs Fire Department will increase. The impacts on Fire Protection Services generated by Less Intense Alternative B are expected to be similar to those resulting from the Proposed Project, and will require mitigation. Levels of demand for the services of the Palm Springs Police Department will increase in proportion to the intensity of the new development. The impacts on Police Protection Services generated by Less Intense Alternative B are expected to be similar to those resulting from the proposed project, and would require mitigation This alternative would result in a student population of 214, slightly less than that generated by the proposed project. Recreational Resources: This alternative proposes a pattern and level of development similar to that of the proposed project, and impacts on recreational resources are expected to be similar. Transportation and Traffic: This alternative proposes a similar mix of uses to those of the proposed project and introduces residential development to the project area. The proposed pattern and intensity of development in Less Intense Alternative B is similar to the Proposed Project, although the total square footage of commercial development is greater and the number of residential units is less. The overall numbers of people drawn into the area under this alternative will generally be less than those under the proposed project and traffic impacts would be slightly lower. Utilities and Service Systems: Less Intense Alternative B is estimated to generate a total of 2,247 tons of solid waste annually, a 23% decrease from the 6087i0.1 Resolution No, 22625 Page 56 proposed project. Less Intense Alternative B will generate about 167,126 gallons of wastewater per day, which is 4% less than the proposed project's daily wastewater generation. Economics: Under this alternative, the City's General Fund and Restricted funds would see an annual cash flow at build out of $379,772, without one-time fees, and a total cash flow to the City and RDA of just under $3.1 million, without one- time fees. The differences associated with this alternative are due primarily to the lower number of hotel rooms, which significantly reduce transient occupancy tax. 3. Findings —As discussed above, and confirmed in the EIR, the City of Palm Springs compared the relative impacts and benefits of the proposed project and the Less Intense Alternative B, and did not select this Alternative. The Proposed Project, as described in Section C of these Findings, incorporates monitored mitigation measures and other features that will substantially reduce the environmental effects of the proposed project. 4. Facts —Less Intense Project Alternative B does not fully meet the project objectives of the proposed project, including without limitation it failure to provide the level of commercial and/or residential uses that would assure the success of the Project or adequately encourage a pedestrian lifestyle. This alternative also does not meet many of the benefits associated with the Proposed Project, as outlined in these Findings. Therefore, the City rejected Less Intense Project Alternative B. E. Environmentally Superior Alternative The No Project Alternative, which redevelops the site with only limited new development at the corner of Cahuilla Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way, represents the environmentally superior alternative. Under this alternative, significant impacts associated with aesthetics would be eliminated, and impacts to cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water resources, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, traffic and public services and utilities would be reduced, because of the lack of new development. However, even under this alternative, impacts associated with air quality would remain significant, and would be unavoidable. This is primarily due to the increased trips which would occur with refurbishment and re-occupancy of the retail space, which is currently largely vacant. Finally, under this alternative, annual revenues to the City would be lower, but costs would also be lowered, because no new residents would be generated by this alternative, and the primary costs associated with development, general government and public safety, are associated with residents rather than businesses. The No Project Alternative fails to address or achieve any of the Project goals, including without limitation the development of a successful mix of national and regional retail 600750 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 57 chains with local businesses; the creation of a pedestrian and vehicular connection from Palm Springs Art Museum through Palm Canyon and Indian Canyon Drives; securing a balance of commercial and residential development that that are synergistically related to increase the customer base of the commercial uses and encourage a pedestrian lifestyle. EXHIBIT "B" STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS CEQA requires the City Council, as the decision-making agency, to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered "acceptable." [CEQA Guidelines 15093(a).] CEQA requires the City Council to state, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened. Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the Final EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record [CEQA Guidelines 15093(b)]. In accordance with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council finds that the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, when implemented, will avoid or substantially lessen virtually all of the significant effects identified in the EIR for the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan. Nevertheless, certain significant impacts of the project are unavoidable even after incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures. The project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to a) scenic vistas and aesthetics, b) air quality, and c) historic resources. The EIR and Exhibit "A" provides detailed information regarding these impacts. The City Council finds that all feasible mitigation measures identified in the EIR within the purview of the City will be implemented with the project, and that the remaining significant unavoidable effects are outweighed and are found to be acceptable due to the following specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits based upon the facts set forth above, the EIR, and the record, including without limitation the draft Specific Plan and related documents, as follows: 1. The Project is designed to allow flexibility of design within specific guiding principles, including: a. The highest quality development which provides an exciting and safe living, working, and shopping experience for all. 608750 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 58 b. The creation of a pedestrian and vehicular connection from Palm Springs Art Museum, through Palm Canyon and Indian Canyon Drives to the Resort/Convention Center District. c. The development of retail commercial development which successfully mixes national and regional chain stores with local businesses, focused on the major roadways which bound the site, including North Palm Canyon, Indian Canyon, Tahquitz Canyon, and Belardo. d. A balance of commercial and residential development which assures the success of the area by increasing the number of homes in the downtown, thereby increasing the customer base of the commercial uses e. The development of residential units which relate synergistically to the commercial development around them, and encourage a pedestrian lifestyle with little use for the automobile, f. The development of additional resort hotels which provide luxury accommodations and increase the visitors to the City's downtown protects the quality of life for existing and future residents through goals and policies designed to achieve a desired vision for the City that incorporates smart growth principles, concepts of sustainable development and resource management, and environmental protection. 2. The Project addresses and is intended to affirmatively implement the following special design statements and goals: a. A distinctive and adaptable architectural theme, that incorporates a new sustainability esthetic that will define future development. References to prevailing Modernist, Spanish, and Mediterranean styles may occur. Fundamental principles of the theme will be consistent throughout, with interesting variation in rooflines, elevational articulation, detailing, and materials creating a richly textured built environment. b. Stepping back of the upper floors of buildings to create graduated frontages that allow generous view corridors and reduce the visual dominance of building mass. c. Definitive corner treatments at primary intersections, achieved by introducing distinctive architectural features and corner out backs to buildings. Sidewalks will include projections with special landscaping and surface finishes and street paving will be distinctive. d. Active building frontages and lively "multi-purpose" sidewalks, contributing to a vibrant townscape experience. 608750 1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 59 e. Distinctive design treatments of the Plaza and the associated hierarchy of interlinked, versatile public open spaces, creating a well- defined sense of place. f. Connectivity between internal components of the Specific Plan and the surrounding development, including the Section 14 Master Plan area, hotels, and Convention Center to the east. 3. The Project guides the City in expanding the local economy, which provides jobs, attracts and retains businesses, supports diverse and vibrant commercial areas, recognizes and encourages technological innovations, and generates sufficient revenue to support various local programs and services. 4. The Project promotes development which accommodates anticipated population growth and guides physical development towards a desired image that is consistent with the social, economic, and aesthetic values of the City. 5. The Project provides a guiding framework for the completion of related planning efforts associated with the City's Community Redevelopment Agency, including with limitation the "Design for Development" area, which will allow individual other areas within the downtown and greater downtown area to provide direction for their future growth and successful economic development while maintaining their unique characters. 6. The Project supports the policies and goals of the 2007 General Plan and the Community Redevelopment Agency Merged Area 1 and 2 redevelopment plans, and assists the City to meet future housing needs for the growth in population, including affordable housing. 7. The Project improves mobility through development of a more balanced, multi-modal transportation network, encouraging residential and workplace development near transit corridors, and supports the goals and policies of adopted regional transportation plans. 8. The Project provides for public facilities and services needed to serve the existing and future population and establishes goals and policies to enhance public safety. 9. The Project allows the City to become a model of sustainable development and provide for the long-term conservation and management of the rich natural resources that help to define the City's identity, contribute to its economy, and improve its quality of life. 10. The Project will bring private investment to an economically challenged area of the City and help promote revitalization of the area, in keeping with the broad, general goals of the City's General Plan, the redevelopment plans, and the Project. 608750.1 Resolution No. 22625 Page 60 11. The Project, including the construction of Museum Way, an east-west road that will connect the Palm Springs Art Museum with Indian Canyon Drive, will make the reuse and/or redevelopment of the substantially vacant and deteriorating Desert Fashion Plaza regional shopping center feasible, marketable, and attractive to investors. Museum Way will link the Casino and the Convention Center with downtown and Museum Market Plaza, creating a dynamic pedestrian and vehicular flow that will be attractive to potential retailers and customers alike. 12. The existing Desert Fashion Plaza failed and exists in a substantially vacant and deteriorating condition in large measure due to the lack of the existence of an easily accessible east-west road connector and the creation of such a connection along the general alignment of the proposed Museum Way is necessary for the economic success of the Project. 13. The Project creates and will promote viable economic investment in an economically challenged area of the City. 14 The Project incorporates environmentally sound, sustainable planning and design concepts including: providing housing and retail development with enhanced walkability and transit accessibility for residents and visitors; emphasizing the use of alternative transportation; designing future buildings at greater density than existing in order to more efficiently utilize land resources and preserve open space. 15. The Project will constitute a significant economic benefit to downtown and to the City of Palm Springs. The Project has a significant beneficial economic impact on the area's economy. Each dollar spent locally in downtown Palm Springs cycles through the area economy, generating additional income and employment. 16. The Project, when compared to the other alternatives analyzed in the EIR (including the No Project Alternative) provides the best available balance between maximizing attainment of the project objectives and minimizing significant environmental impacts. Considering all factors, the City Council finds that there are specific economic, legal, social, technological and other considerations associated with the project that outweigh the project's significant unavoidable effects, and the adverse effects are therefore considered acceptable. 608750 1