citrus ranch city approval jan 17, 2007

8/12/2019 Citrus Ranch City Approval Jan 17, 2007

1/197

INDIO CITY COUNCILAGENDA REPORTTO: LENN SOUTHARD, CITY MANAGERFROM: tephen Copenhaver, Community Development DirectorDATE: anuary 17, 2007SUBJECTAPPLICATION: unCal Companies, an Environmental Assessment (EIR), GeneralPlan Amendment, Change of Zone, Specific Plan, Pre-AnnexationDevelopment Agreement, Tentative Tract Map (Large Lot/37Planning Areas), and Tentative Tract Map (457 Residential Units)for property located on the west side of Dillon Road, approximatelythree miles north of Interstate 10.SUMMARYThe project proponent has requested certification of the final Environmental ImpactReport with Mitigation Monitoring Program based on an Environmental Assessment 05-11-442; General Plan Amendment 05-11-74 to the City's General Plan Land Useelement; Change of Zone 06-11-648 to pre-zone the site as Specific Plan (SP); SpecificPlan 05-11-16 to establish the development standards for the development of the site;a Pre-Annexation Development Agreement 06-10-22 between the City of Indio andSunCal Companies; Tentative Tract Map 34485 (TM 06-10-447 Large Lot) to allow thesubdivision into 37 planning areas, and Tentative Tract Map 35057 (TM 06-10-448) toallow the subdivision of 85.94 acres into 457 residential lots.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONThat the City Council:

a. Certify the final Environmental Impact Report for Environmental Assessment 05-11-442; adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations and adopting aMitigation Monitoring Program; andb. Approve General Plan Amendment 05-11-74, based on the findings andconditions of approval; andc. Approve Change of Zone 06-11-648, based on the findings and conditions ofapproval; andd. Approve Specific Plan 05-11-16, based on the findings and conditions of approval;ande. Approve Pre-Annexation Development Agreement 06-10-22, based on thefindings and conditions of approval; andf, Approve the Tentative Tract Map 34485 (TM 06-10-447), based on the findings

For City Council Agen ITEM NO. 8


2/197

CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 17, 2007PAGE 2

and conditions of approval; andg. Approve the Tentative Tract Map 35057 (TM 06-10-448), based on the findingsand conditions of approval.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTPursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), theCity reviewed this project and determined that an Environmental Impact Report wasrequired. As a result of this determination an EIR was prepared. The EIR determinedthat although the proposed project could result in significant impacts, most impactscould be mitigated to a less than significant level with exception to Air Quality andMineral Resources, in which a statement of overriding considerations is necessary.SURROUNDING LAND USESThe site is located in an area generally surrounded by vacant unimproved parcels.ANALYSIS

General Plan Amendment 05-11-74 (To Allow Sphere of Influence Expansion)The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) requires under State law that beforeany City amends its SOI, the area under consideration must be pre-designated andadopted into the City General Plan. Amending the 501 would allow the City in the futureto annex this area into the City's official boundary lines.The project site consists of approximately 1,183 acres. Currently, only about half of thesite is designated with the City's General Plan land use designation of Open Space(OP). However, the other portion of the site is only covered under Riverside CountyLand Use Designations (See Exhibit).The suggested General Plan land use designation for the entire project site is SpecificPlan (SP). This proposed designation allows for overall flexibility in design andcomposition that will blend several different land use types into a single project. Theproposed City's General Plan land use designation for the subject site would require thatdevelopment be subject to a SP and further require an applicant to prepare and file aSpecific Plan for any proposed development on the project site. The SP is part of theland use approvals sought by the applicant.Change of Zone 06-11-648 (Pre-Zoning)Pursuant to the City's Zoning Ordinance and the Local Agency Formation Commission(LAFCO) requirements, the City must amend it's zoning Ordinance to pre-zone the areaunder consideration. The site is designated with numerous Riverside County Zoningdesignations (See Change of Zone Exhibit Attachment F). The suggested pre-zoningdesignation for the entire project site is Specific Plan (SP).Specific Plan 05-11-16The applicant has prepared a Specific Plan (See Attachment F) in conformance with the


3/197

CITY COU NCIL - JANUARY 17 , 2007P A G E 3City's General Plan. The SP limits the potential number of units to 3,075 on the 1,183acre site. The SP provides a Land Use Master Plan, Open Space/Recreational Plan,Circulation Plan, Grading and Drainage Plan, Fire/Emergency Management Plan,Utilities Systems, Planning Area Standards, and Development Regulations (SeeSpecific Plan Page 15 Table 3-1).The SP delineates 37 planning areas within the site. The plan includes a mixture ofneighborhoods and recreational uses designed to create a fully integrated masterplanned community. The plan incorporates open space with various housing densities.Some of the most noteworthy amenities included within the project are the 186 acres ofundisturbed open space, 3 acres of wilderness trails, 6.1 acres of community parks, 9.3acres of neighborhood parks, 11.3 acres citrus grove paseos, 56.2 acres of recreationopen space and playfields, and 233.1 acres golf course (18-hole).Other amenities include a 6 acre site for a club house, 5 acre site for a communitycenter, 2 acre site for a fire station site, and a 5.4 acre site for a boutique hotel. Theproposed amenities and open space proposed within the development far exceed theCity's General Plan requirements. Of the 37 planning areas in the SP, 29 are proposedfor residential uses. Based on the land use plan shown in the SP and the table below,only 576 acres out of the total 1183.5 acres are proposed for residential land uses. Theproposed density ranges from 2.5 to 14 dwelling units per acre. As outlined in the SP,all residential planning areas are consistent with the City's General Plan (See SpecificPlan Page 16 Table 3-2).Pre-Annexation Development Agreement 06-10-22The Development Agreement addresses and resolves many of the terms and conditionsunder which the developer and the City will proceed with the development of theprimarily residential development. A brief summary of the important terms of the DAare: The Development Agreement ("DA") has a term of 20 years; Allows for on site density transfers; Quimby fees are satisfied by improvements of on site parks, trails, and recreationfacilities; Outlines the construction of various public improvements such as streets andwater facilities.Tentative Tract Map 34485 (TM 06-10-447 Large Lot)Pu rsuant to the Sub division M ap Act and City requ irements, the app l icant is seekingapproval to subdivide 1,183 acres into 37 planning areas to allow for the masterplanning of the project site. The subdivision application will allow the developer tocoordinate, carefully plan, and implement each planning area consistent with theproposed SP. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the proposed specificplan; therefore the findings for approval can be made.Tentative Tract Map 35057 (TM 06-10-448)This TTM includes a total of 457 residential lots, with lettered lots for streets, park area,drainage, landscaping, sidewalks, public utility easements, common areas, retention,


4/197

CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 17, 2007PAGE 4

and driveway access. The proposed project will take primary community access fromDillon Road and Avenue 40, with secondary access proposed off Dillon Road, at thesouthern most portion of the site. The primary community access will not be gated.However, a gate is proposed directly south of the round-a-bout adjacent to PlanningArea 13. The southernmost secondary access is proposed to be gated as well.Circulation. The collector street or the spine road which traverses the entire project isproposed at 120 feet wide. Entry roads are proposed to be 150 feet wide. Interiorstreets are shown at 43 feet in width. Many of the proposed streets are curvilinearwhich will prevent vehicles from reaching excessive speeds or facilitate "race-ways".The proposed circulation system for the project conforms to the City's standard.Map Design: The TTM proposes to subdivide 457 lots on 85.94 acres. The lots range insize from 5,000 to 10,500 square feet. The project will have a density of 5.31 dwellingunits to the acre. The proposed subdivision is located within Planning Area 6, LowDensity Residential and Planning Areas 4, 5, 7, 8, and 9 are located within MediumDensity Residential. All proposed lots within the proposed TTM are consistent with theproposed SP with respect to lot size, density, and development requirements.PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONAt the December 13, 2006 meeting, the Planning Commission, on a 4-1 vote,considered the Environmental Impact Report, pursuant to the environmental reviewguidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act and found that environmentalimpacts were adequately examined in the Environmental Assessment 05-11-442. TheCommission recommended approval of General Plan Amendment 05-11-74,recommended approval of Change of Zone 06-11-648, recommended approval ofSpecific Plan 05-11-16, recommended approval of Development Agreement 06-7-21,recommended approval of Tentative Parcel Map 34485 (TM 06-10-447 Large Lot), andrecommended approval of Tentative Parcel Map 35057 (TM 06-10-448).Chairperson Reed voted no on the proposed project because she felt the project lackedcommercial and retail opportunities for residents within the proposed development. Shefurther stated that residents within the proposed development would have to travel moreseven miles to the nearest grocery store for bread or milk. Chairperson Reed indicatedthat the proposed Specific Plan should be redesigned to incorporate a commercialcomponent as part of the planning.COMMENTS RECEIVEDAs of this writing, no comments or requests have been received from the publicregarding the proposed project. However, comments were received regarding theDEIR, pursuant to CEQA, all comments have been addressed and responded to in theFinal EIR (FEIR).


5/197

Prepa d Y :

Sean re, Senior Planner

CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 17, 2007PAGE 5PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESSA 10-day public hearing notice was published in the Desert Sun newspaper onDecember 23, 2006. In addition, the public hearing notice was mailed to surroundingproperty owners within 300 feet of the subject property on December 20, 2006.

ALTERNATIVES1. Deny the Project.2 Refer the project to the Planning Commission for redesign.

Submitted by:

Community Development DirectorATTACHMENTSExhibit- A. Vicinity MapExhibit- B. Resolutions, Ordinances, and FindingsExhibit- C. December 13, 2006 Planning Commission Staff Report (without attachments)Exhib i t . D. December 13, 2006 Planning Commission Draft MinutesExhibit- E. EIR, Specific Plan, Pre-Annexation Development Agreement, Sphere of Influence

Exhibits, General Plan Exhibit, Zone Change Exhibit, and Tentative Tract Maps


6/197

EXHIBIT A

Vicinity Map


7/197

-Mg mir.

Project Area

10

a

Vicinity Map


8/197

EXHIBIT BResolutions, Ordinances, and Findings


9/197

RESOLUTION NO.RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIOC E R T I FY IN G T H E FIN A L E N V IR O N M E N T A L IM P A C T R E P O R T P R E P A R E DFOR THE CITRUS RANCH PROJECT AND ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTALFINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITYACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND AMITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAMWHEREAS, the Citrus Ranch Project entails a General Plan Amendment, Change

of Zone, Specific Plan, Development Agreement and Tentative Tract Maps to facilitate (1)the annexation of approximately 1,183 acres (the "CRSP Site") into the City for thedevelopment of the Citrus Ranch master planned community, consisting of up to 3,075dwelling units (single-family and multi-family housing types), a golf course, a clubhouse,trails, a community center, a boutique hotel, parks, open space, and related infrastructureand other public facilities, including three above-ground off-site water reservoirs; and (2)the annexation of approximately 376 acres immediately south of the CRSP Site; and,

WHEREAS, the Citrus Ranch Specific Plan ("CRSP") will govern the Project's landuse and development components, including the type and density of allowable land use,design standards. architecture, landscaping, circulation, infrastructure, and other planningand design components; and,

WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code, 2 1 0 0 0 e t seq . ) ( "C E QA" ) and t he S ta te C E QA G u ide li nes (1 4 C a l. C od e R egs . 1 5 0 0 0 e tseq.) the City of Indio ("City") is the lead agency for the Project; and,

WHEREAS, in compliance with CEQA, the City determined that an EnvironmentalImpact Report ("EIR") was required to analyze the potential environmental effects of theProject; and,

W H ER E AS , t he C i t y i ssued a N o t i ce o f Preparat ion ( "N O P " ) o f t he D raft E IR fo r t heProject on November 23, 2005 for a period of 30 days and a revised NOP that describedchan ges t o t he Pro jec t on M arch 2 9 , 2 0 0 6 fo r a per iod o f 30 days p u rsuan t t o S tate C E QAGuidelines sections 15082(a), 15103 and 15375; and,WHEREAS, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15082, the City solicitedcomments from potential responsible agencies; and,WHEREAS, the City completed the Draft EIR for the Project and released thed o c u m e n t fo r a 45 d a y p u b l i c re v ie w an d c o m m e n t p eri o d c o m m e n c in g o n O c t o b e r 2 , 2 0 0 6and ending on November 15, 2006 in accordance with the requirements of Public

Resources Code section 21092. The City sent copies of the Draft EIR to numerous publicagencies, organizations and individuals; and,W H E R E A S , d u ri n g t h e 45 -d a y c o m m e n t p e ri o d , th e C i t y re c ei v ed v a ri o u s c o m m e n tletters an the Draft EIR from public agencies and others interested parties; and,


10/197

W H E R E AS , afte r t he con c lus ion o f the 4 5-day co m m en t period , C i t y S taff p repareda Final FIR, which consists of the Draft EIR, verbatim copies of the comment lettersreceived on the Draft EIR, the City's response to the comments, and other pertinenti n form at ion . (here inafter referred to as th e "F ina l E IR") for rev iew and co ns iderat ion by theCity's decision-making bodies on the Project; and,

W H E R E A S , th e P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s io n , a t i ts r eg u l a rl y s c h e d u l e d p u b l ic m e et in g o nDecember 13, 2006, considered the Final EIR and recommended that the City Councilapprove General Plan Amendment #05-11-74, Change of Zone #06-11-648, Specific Plan#05-11-16, Development Agreement #06-10-22, Tentative Tract Map #34485 [subdivisionof 1,183 acres into 37 planning areas] and Tentative Tract Map #35057 [subdivision of85.94 acres into 457 residential lots] (collectively "Land Use Entitlements") for the Project;and,

WHEREAS, the City Council, at a noticed public meeting on January 17, 2007,considered certification of the Final EIR and approval of the Land Use Entitlements for theProject; and,WHEREAS, prior to approving the Land Use Entitlements for the Project, the CityCouncil reviewed and considered the Final EIR and all of the information and data in the

administrative record, including, all oral and written comments and evidence presented tothe City and certified the Final EIR; and,WHEREAS, none of the oral or written comments presented to the City Councilconstitutes significant new information requiring recirculation of the Final EIR pursuant tosection 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines; and,WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution haveoccurred.NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF INDIO AS FOLLOWS:Section1. The City Council hereby certifies that the Final EIR, which includes theDraft EIR and related technical appendices, has been completed in compliance withCEQA.

S ec t ion 2 . The C i ty C ou nc i l has rev iewed and con s idered t he in fo rmat ion co n ta inedin the Final EIR prior to approval of the Project and that the Final EIR reflects the City'sindependent judgment and analysis.Section 3. The City Council finds that feasible changes or alterations have been

required in, or incorporated into, the Project, which avoid or substantially lessen certainsignificant environmental effects of the Project.

Section 4. The City Council adopts the Findings of Fact attached hereto as ExhibitA and incorporated herein by reference.

2


11/197

Section 5 he City Council further adopts the Statement of OverridingConsiderations attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference findingthat the benefits of the Project outweigh (1) the significant and unavoidable direct andcumulative air quality and mineral resources impacts of the Project and (2) the significantand unavoidable cumulative agricultural resources, water consumption, and populationimpacts of the Project.

Section 6. The City Council finds that the recommended mitigation measurescon tained in t he in t he E IR s ha l l be imp lem en ted and ado p t s t he M i ti ga ti on M on i to r ing an dR ep or t ing P rog ram a ttached h ere to as E x h ib i t C t o en sure t ha t al l m i t iga t ion m easu res w i l lbe implemented.PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of January, 2007, by the followingvote, to wit:

AYES:NOES:ABSENT:

BEN GODFREYMayor

ATTEST:

CYNTHIA HERNANDEZCity Clerk

3


12/197

EXHIBIT AFINDINGS OF FACT

4


13/197

EXHIBIT ACEQA FINDINGS OF FACT

I. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSEThe City Council of the City of Indio ("Council") as the decision-making body of the LeadAgency for the Citrus Ranch Specific Plan project ("Project") hereby adopts and makesthe following findings of fact ("Findings") in connection with its certification of the FinalEnvironmental Impact Report ("FEIR") for the Project. The FEIR is a Project EIR, asdefined by Guideline 15161 of the State Guidelines for the California EnvironmentalQuality Act ("CEQA Guidelines"), and serves as an informational document for thegeneral public, the City and other government agencies. The Council makes theseFindings after reviewing and analyzing the environmental effects examined in the FEIR.These Findings are adopted in compliance with the California Environmental QualityAct, California Public Resources Code 21000 et seq. ("CEQA"). The FEIR identifiescertain significant effects which may occur as a result of the proposed Project, or whichmay occur on a cumulative basis in conjunction with the development of the Project andother past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects. In addition to reviewingthe Project's potential environmental impacts, these Findings also provide the Council'sanalysis and conclusions regarding the applicability of possible alternatives andmitigation measures to reduce any significant environmental effects.II. THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

A. ontents of the RecordThe following information is incorporated by reference and made part of the record ofproceedings to support the Council's findings of fact regarding the environmental effectsof the Project:1. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and related technical appendices,all other documents relied upon or incorporated by reference into the DEIR, theFEIR and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference in the FEIR andMitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (collectively the "EIR").2. All testimony, documentary evidence and all correspondence submitted to ordelivered to the City in connection with the meetings and public hearings at which

City decision-making bodies considered the EIR.All staff reports, memoranda, maps, slides, letters, minutes of meetings and otherdocuments that City staff and/or its consultants relied upon or prepared inconjunction with the Project.

4. ny other documents specified by Public Resources Code section 21167.6(e).

1


14/197


B. ocation of Administrative RecordThe City is the custodian of the administrative record, including all CEQA documentsand the other background documents and materials, which constitute the record of theproceedings upon which the City's decisions to certify the Final EIR and approve theProject are based. The administrative record is located at the City of Indio City Hall,Community Development Services Department, 100 Civic Center Mall, Indio, California92201.III. URPOSE OF FINDINGSThe Final FIR evaluates the significant adverse environmental impacts that could resultfrom the Project. Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guideline 15091requires that the public agency approving or carrying out the project shall make writtenfindings for each significant impact identified in the SEIR, accompanied by a briefexplanation of the rationale for each finding. These findings include one of thefollowing:1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project

which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as definedin the EIR.2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction ofanother public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes

have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by suchother agency.3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including

provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasiblethe mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.These findings accomplish the following:1. They address the significant environmental effects identified in the SEIR for theapproved project.2. They incorporate all mitigation measures associated with these significantimpacts identified in the EIR.3. They explain whether a significant effect is avoided or reduced by the adoptedmitigation measures to a less than significant level, or remain significant andunavoidable, either because there are no feasible mitigation measures orbecause, even with implementation of mitigation measures, an impact wouldremain significant.The conclusions presented in these findings are based on the EIR and other evidencein the record of proceedings.

2


15/197


16/197


The annexation of the CRSP area and SAA into the City of Indio fromunincorporated Riverside County (approving authority will be LAFCO); A General Plan Amendment to include the CRSP (approving authority will be the

City); Approval of the CRSP (approving authority will be the City); A development agreement between the project applicant and the City that willprovide the applicant with vested development rights in exchange for theconstruction of required infrastructure improvements by the developer, thepayment of applicable fees, or some other arrangement (approving authority will

be the City); Subsequent approval of a Large Lot Tentative Tract Map (approving authority will

be the City); and Subsequent approval of a small lot tentative tract map for the first phase of theproject (approving authority will be the City).

C. roject ObjectivesThe following objectives were identified relative to the annexation into the City:

To annex areas to the City of Indio in a geographically congruous manner. To modify the boundaries of the City's Sphere of Influence. To facilitate future development in the City's Sphere of Influence. To forward the objectives identified in the City's General Plan.

The proposed Project has the following objectives relative to the CRSP: To provide a high-quality, mixed-density residential development within a systemof parks, open space, a golf course, and trails north of the City of Indio. To implement the provisions of and be consistent with the approvedDevelopment Agreement for the Project Site, in a feasible and viable manner,taking into account, among other factors, the need to generate enough value to

support bonding programs used to finance major infrastructure and other publicfacilities and allow for the large-scale protection of open space on the Site.

V. HE EIR PROCESSIn accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA"), the City circulated a Notice of Preparation ("NOP") for the proposed Projecton November 23, 2005. Following substantial revisions to the Project, the Cityrecirculated a revised NOP on March 29, 2006, to reflect the changes in the project

4


17/197


description. The purpose of the NOP was to solicit comments on the proposed contentof the EIR.On April 25, 2006, the City held a scoping meeting to elicit further comments fromgovernmental agencies and interested parties regarding the scope and content ofenvironmental issues germane to the EIR. All NOP responses relating to the EIR werereviewed and the issues raised in those comments were addressed, to the extentfeasible, in the DEIR. Both NOPs and letters received during the NOP comment periodare included in Appendix A of the DEIR.On September 29, 2006, the City prepared and distributed the Notice of Availability ofthe DEIR to all interested agencies, parties, organizations and persons. The DEIR wascirculated for a 45-day review period, between October 2, 2006 and November 15,2006.The City received eight letters from agencies, organizations, and individual partiescommenting on the DEIR. The written comments are included in the FEIR in Section 3[Response to Comments].VI. HE COUNCIL'S CERTIFICATION OF THE FEIRPursuant to section 21082.1(c) of the Public Resources Code, the Council herebyFINDS and CERTIFIES that:

The FEIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA.2. The FEIR has been presented to the Council, and the Council has independentlyreviewed and analyzed the information contained in the FEIR prior to acting on

the Project.3. The FEIR reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis.VII. EFFECT OF FINDINGSTo the extent that these Findings conclude that various proposed mitigation measuresoutlined in the FEIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, orwithdrawn, the Council hereby adopts these measures. The mitigation measures areexpress conditions of approval of the Project. The Council will adopt concurrently withthese Findings the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("MMRP") attached tothe FEIR to ensure that the responsible party actually implements the mitigationmeasures. The MMRP developed for the Project includes applicable mitigationmeasures from the FEIR and new measures that the City developed in conjunction withthe EIR process. To the extent that any discrepancies exist between the MMRP andthese Findings, the provisions in these Findings shall control.

5


18/197


VIII. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ANALYZED IN THE EIRThese Findings address the potentially significant environmental effects examined in theFEIR. The FEIR analyzed the environmental impacts at a project-specific level and ona "cumulative- impact basis. A cumulative impact is defined by CEQA Guidelines 15130and 15355 as an impact which is created as a result of the combination of impacts ofthe project evaluated in the EIR and closely related past, present and reasonablyforeseeable probable future impacts (commonly known as "related projects"). The FEIRidentified 15 related projects in the relevant geographic area. The inclusion of those 15related projects in the cumulative impact analysis resulted in a conservative analysissince it is not likely that all of those projects will be developed.

A. ummary of Impact AnalysisThe EIR analyzes all potentially significant impacts of the Project for the environmentaltopics identified during the public scoping process, including responses to the NOP, apublic scoping meeting, and consultation with interested agencies and individuals.In summary, the Council finds that the following environmental impacts are less thansignificant on a project-specific basis in light of the EIR and the whole record before it,including the imposition of appropriate mitigation measures: 1) aesthetics,(2) agricultural resources, (3) biological resources, (4) cultural resources, (5) geologyand soils, (6) hazardous materials, (7) hydrology and water quality, (8) land use andplanning, (9) noise, (10) population and housing, (11) public services, (12) recreation,(13) traffic and circulation, and (14) utilities. he Council has incorporated thereferenced mitigation measures into the Project pursuant to its concurrent adoption ofthe Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.The following environmental impacts were determined to be significant and unavoidableon both a project-specific and cumulative basis even after the imposition of all feasiblemitigation measures: (1) air quality and (2) mineral resources. In addition, the followingimpacts are significant and unavoidable on a cumulative basis, but not on a project-specific basis: (1) agricultural resources, (2) water consumption, and (3) population.In addition, the EIR analyzed growth inducing, unavoidable adverse and irreversibleimpacts, and consistency with Southern California Association of Governments("SCAG") policies. The EIR also evaluated several project alternatives, pursuant toCEQA Guideline 15126.6.

6


19/197


IX. INDINGS ON IMPACTS ANALYZED IN THE EIR

A. esthetics1 . otential ImpactsThe Project may cause a significant impact on aesthetics if it would:

a) have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista;b) substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees,rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway;c) substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site andits surroundings; ord) create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adverselyaffect day or nighttime views in the area.

2 indingsThe Project will not have a significant impact to aesthetics. Accordingly, the Councilfinds that no mitigation measures are required with respect to aesthetics.3 . upportive RationaleThe DEIR analyzes potential impacts on aesthetics and visual resources in Section 3.1.These impacts are determined to be less-than-significant for the reasons below.

a) The Project will not have a significant impact on the identified scenic vistaof the Indio Hills, or substantially degrade the existing visual character orquality of the Site. The area of on-site grading would be on a lowerportion of two low-lying hills that are not prominent characteristics of theIndio Hills. In addition, the summits and ridgelines of the hills to be gradedonly rise approximately 100 feet above their base, in contrast to theportions of the hills that rise more than 600 feet above their base. Themodification will also be limited to the extreme lower elevations of theIndio Hills, and will not be readily noticeable from the City of Indio or DillonRoad.

b) Dillon Road has not been designated as a state scenic highway.c) There will be no significant impact due to the introduction of light and glareby the Project because structures and lighting would only riseapproximately 50 to 75 feet above the base of a low-lying area of the IndioHills, and would not be highly noticeable from a distance.

7


20/197


dl he Project will be consistent with the City's hillside development policy,Policy CD-1.14 of the City's zoning code, because of the small scale ofgrading required, which will not be prominent when viewed from adistance.

B. gricultural Resources1 . otential ImpactsThe Project would have a significant impact on agricultural resources if it would:

a) onvert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of StatewideImportance to non-agricultural use;conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Actcontract; or

c) involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to theirlocation or nature, would result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses.2 . indingsThe Project will not have a significant impact on agricultural resources. Accordingly, theCouncil finds that no mitigation measures are required with respect to agriculturalresources.3 upportive RationalePotential impacts to agricultural resources are evaluated in DEIR Section 3.2. Theseimpacts are determined to be less-than-significant for these reasons:

a) As reflected in Appendix B of the DEIR, the impact of converting farmlandto non-agricultural use at the Project Site was assessed in accordancewith the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment("LESA") Model developed by the California Department of Conservation.The final LESA score for the proposed Project is 46.59, which is in therange (40 to 59 points) considered significant only if the LE and SA sub-scores are both at least 20 points. Because the LE sub-score was 19.59points, these LESA scores indicate no significant impact on agriculturalresources.

b) The Project is consistent with Goal AR-2 of the City's General Planbecause it would not remove from agricultural production an area wheresoils have been classified as Prime Agricultural Soils or State AgriculturalSoils.

8


21/197


C. ir Quality Construction1 . otential ImpactsThe construction of the Project may cause a significant and unavoidable air qualityimpact if it would:

a) conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan;b) violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing orprotected air quality violation;c) result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant

for which the project region is non attainment under an applicable nationalor state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions whichexceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors);

d) expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; orpeople; ore) create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

2 indingsThe construction of the Project will create a significant and unavoidable air qualityimpact on a project-specific basis. The Council makes the following findings for thesei m p a c t s :

a) All feasible measures, changes and alterations have been required in, orIncorporated into, the Project, which will lessen such significantenvironmental effects.

b) For the reasons set forth below in the Statement of OverridingConsiderations, adopted concurrently by the Council, the Council findsthat the significant impact identified in this section IX(C) is acceptable inlight of the Project's overall benefits.

c) Although the following mitigation measures aimed at reducing thesesignificant and unavoidable air quality impacts during Project constructionhave been adopted, these mitigation measures will not reduce thesignificant impact to a level of insignificance.3-1 uring all phases of construction, all equipment shall be properlyand routinely maintained, as recommended by manufacturer manuals.This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the CommunityDevelopment Director.

9


22/197

EXHIBIT ACEQA FINDINGS OF FACT3-2 uring all phases of construction, all contractors shall restrict idlingtime to five minutes or less in any given hour. This measure shall beimplemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.3-3 here feasible, alternative clean fuels such as compressed naturalgas-powered equipment with oxidation catalysts shall be used instead ofgasoline or diesel-powered engines. However, where diesel equipmenthas to be used because of a lack of alternatives, the constructioncontractor shall use particulate filters, oxidation catalysts, and low sulfurdiesel as defined in South Coast Air Quality Management DistrictrSCAQMD") Rule 431.2. This measure shall be implemented to thesatisfaction of the Community Development Director.3-4 here feasible, aqueous or emulsified diesel fuel shall be used forall construction equipment. This measure shall be implemented to thesatisfaction of the Community Development Director.3-5 uring construction of Phases 2 and 3, temporary power from thepower grid shall be provided onsite for electric tools such as saws, drills,and compressors, thereby decreasing the need for fuel-poweredgenerators and other fuel-powered equipment. This measure shall beimplemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.3-6 ero-VOC paints (assumes no more than 100 grams/liter of volatileorganic chemicals ("VOC")) shall be used where feasible. This measureshall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community DevelopmentDirector.

3 . upportive RationaleSection 3.3 of the DEIR analyzes air quality impacts during construction of the Project.The analysis relies on the reports in Appendix C of the DEIR, including (1) the CitrusRanch Specific Plan Air Quality Impact Analysis (Revised) by Urban Crossroads, datedApril 28, 2006; (2) the Additional Air Quality Model Output by Michael BrandmanAssociates, dated May 2006; and (3) the Peer-Review of Air Quality Impact Analysis,CRSP, by Michael Brandman Associates, dated January 25, 2006.The Project is not expected to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutantconcentrations during construction. Further, based on the land uses selected for theProject, and rapid dispersion of any diesel exhaust odors, construction of the Project isnot expected to create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.The Project is consistent with the City's General Plan because it complies withapplicable air quality policies due to proposed mitigation measures and project designfeatures. In addition, the Project will comply with all City ordinances relating to airquality.However, air quality impacts during Project construction cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level for the reasons set forth below.

1 0


23/197

EXHIBIT ACEQA FINDINGS OF FACTThe DEIR estimated air quality impacts during construction by using theCalifornia Air Resources Board's ("CARB") URBEMIS2002 (version 8.7.0)emissions inventory model. These estimated emission levels werecompared against regional and localized significance thresholds adoptedby the SCAQMD. Construction of the Project will not be consistent withthe 2003 Air Quality Management Plan ("AQMP"), the applicable airquality plan, because construction activities could emit pollutants inexcess of SCAQMD's regional thresholds for VOCs, nitrous oxides("NOx"), carbon monoxide ("CO") and particulate matter of ten microns orless in diameter ("PM10"), and localized thresholds for NOx and PM10.The region is in nonattainment status under the applicable state and/ornational standards for ozone, PM10 and PM2.5.

b) ven though the Project complies with applicable control measures in theAQMP and SCAQMD rules, construction activities could violate theSCAQMD's air quality standards by contributing to an air quality violation.

D. ir Quality - Operation1. otential ImpactsThe operation of the Project may cause a significant and unavoidable air quality impactif it would:

a) conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan;b) violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or

protected air quality violation;c) result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant

for which the project region is non attainment under an applicable nationalor state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions whichexceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors);

d) expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; ore) create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

2. indingsThe operation of the Project will create a significant and unavoidable air quality impacton a project-specific basis. The Council makes the following findings for these impacts:

a) ll feasible measures, changes and alterations have been required in, orincorporated into, the Project, which will lessen such significantenvironmental effects.

11


24/197


b) or the reasons set forth below in the Statement of OverridingConsiderations, adopted concurrently by the Council, the Council findsthat the significant impact identified in this section IX (D) is acceptable inlight of the Project's overall benefits.Although the following mitigation measures aimed at reducing thesesignificant and unavoidable air quality impacts during Project operationshave been adopted, these mitigation measures will not reduce thesignificant impact to a level of insignificance.3-7 rior to the issuance of a building permit, plans to incorporate thefollowing mitigation measures shall be implemented in accordance withthe Community Development Director. Homes shall be built in a mannerthat meets or exceeds the statewide energy construction requirements toat least Title 24 standards and shall include the following: Install efficient heating and other appliances, such as water heaters,cooking equipment, refrigerators, furnaces and boiler units to at least

Title 24 requirements; Insulation shall meet or exceed Title 24 requirements; Double-paned windows and energy efficient doors shall be installed; Install electrical outlets on the exterior walls of both the front and backof residences to promote the use of electric landscape maintenance

equipment; When feasible, design buildings with proper orientation, fenestration,and other design components that maximize the potential of passivecooling and heating to the maximum extent possible.3-8 o discourage the burning of wood in fireplaces, gas-burningfireplaces shall be installed where builders are including fireplaces in theirprojects. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of theCommunity Development Director.3-9 o reduce road dust, a street sweeper shall clean the streets aminimum of once every month or more frequently as needed. Thismeasure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the CommunityDevelopment Director.3-10 During the sale of the residences, electric solar panels and solar-powered water heaters shall be presented to the home-buyers as anoption. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of theCommunity Development Director.

12


25/197


26/197


by the California Department of Fish and Game ("CDFG") or United StatesFish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS");

b) have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitivenatural community identified in local or regional plans, policies,regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS;

c) have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands asdefined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limitedto, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,hydrological interruption, or other means;d) interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or

migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native, resident, ormigratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nurserysites;conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biologicalresources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; and

f) onflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional,or state habitat conservation plan.

2. indingsThe Project will impact biological resources on a project-specific basis. The Councilmakes the following findings for these impacts:

a) All feasible measures, changes and alterations have been required in, orincorporated into, the Project, which will lessen such significantenvironmental effects.b) With implementation of the following mitigation measures, the Project'simpacts to biological resources are less than significant.

4-1 rior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shallcomply with the terms set forth in the Memorandum of Understanding("MOU") with respect to measures designed to protect or preservebiological resources, irrespective of whether the Coachella Valley Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan ("CVMSHCP") is fully adopted. In theevent that the CVMSHCP is not fully adopted, the project applicant shallpay the Fringe-toed lizard habitat assessment fee applicable to theproject, if any. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction ofthe Community Development Director.

1 4


27/197


4-2 f grading is to begin during the breeding season, a radius of 50meters (approximately 165 feet) will be marked around all activeburrowing owl burrows, and no grading activities or other disturbances willtake place within this 50-meter radius. All active burrows will be monitoredby a qualified biologist until the breeding season is over and any youngoccupying the burrow have fledged and become independent.Subsequently, mitigation will proceed as outlined in Mitigation Measure 4-3 for the non-breeding season. This measure shall be implemented to thesatisfaction of the Community Development Director.4-3 uring the non-breeding season, burrowing owls within all occupiedburrows will be passively excluded from occupied burrows by a qualifiedbiologist using one-way doors. Once the owls have been evicted, burrowswill be collapsed to prevent reoccupation. This measure shall beimplemented to the satisfaction of the City Community DevelopmentDirector4-4 o prevent potential impacts to nesting birds, the removal ofvegetation or other potential nesting habitat should take place, to theextent feasible, outside of nesting season (generally February 15 toAugust 15). Where this is not feasible, a survey for nesting birds will beconducted no more than seven days prior to the commencement of anyground or vegetation disturbing activities. All active bird nests will bemapped and marked with a 200-foot avoidance perimeter. Ground orvegetation disturbing activities will be postponed until a qualified biologisthas determined that the nests are no longer active. This measure shall beimplemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.4-5 To avoid permanent adverse impacts to the 5.4-acre mesquitehummock area on the project site, a similarly sized mesquite hummockwill be created within the project's preserved open space. A draftrevegetation plan in compliance with the MOU will be produced andsubmitted to the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission ("CVCC")prior to the issuance of grading permits. The draft plan will consider andincorporate here ppropriate he riteria or hisrestoration/enhancement/ revegetation effort provided in Exhibit "S" of theMOU documents, which are included as part of the technical appendicesof the DEIR. The plan shall not require the City or project applicant toprovide funds for long-term management of the area, but shall providemechanisms whereby permanent management, maintenance, monitoring,and funding will occur by means of Codes, Covenants and Restrictions, aHomeowner's Association, or other applicable arrangement. This measurewill be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community DevelopmentDirector. and shall be contingent upon prior approval of the revegetationplan by the CVCC.4-6 o reduce impacts to stabilized and partially stabilized desert sandfields to below a level of significance, the developer or its designee shall

15


28/197


restore, revegetated, and /or enhance approximately 29 acres of stabilizedand partially stabilized desert sand fields within the project site. A draftrevegetation plan in compliance with the MOU will be produced andsubmitted to the CVCC prior to the issuance of grading permits. The draftplan will consider and incorporate where appropriate the criteria for thisrestoration/ enhancement/revegetation effort provided in Exhibit "S" of theMOU documents, which are included as part of the technical appendicesof the DEIR. The plan shall not require the City or project applicant toprovide funds for long-term management of the area, but shall providemechanisms whereby permanent management, maintenance, monitoring,and funding will occur by means of Codes, Covenants and Restrictions, aHomeowner's Association, or other applicable arrangement. hismeasure will be implemented to the satisfaction of the CommunityDevelopment Director, and shall be contingent upon prior approval of therevegetation plan by the CVCC.

3 . upportive RationalePotential impacts to biological resources are discussed in Section 3.4 of the DEIR,which relies on reports in Appendix D. For the reasons set forth below, the identifiedimpacts can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

a) The Project proposes measures to mitigate substantial adverse effects,either directly or through habitat modifications, on certain plant and animalspecies identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species inlocal or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CaliforniaDepartment of Fish and Game ("CDFG") or United States Fish and WildlifeService ("USFWS"). Seven plant and 22 wildlife sensitive species havethe potential to exist on the Project Site. Three sensitive vegetationcommunities were also identified on site: mesquite hummocks, stabilizeddesert sand fields, and active desert dunes. The impacts to sensitiveplant or animal species or natural communities can be mitigated byimplementation of the Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") betweenthe City, Coachella Valley Association of Governments ("CVAG") andCVCC, dated June 14, 2006. Further, the applicant will create a mesquitehummock community within the Project's open space of similar size to 5.4-acre hummock that will be disturbed as a result of development on theCRSP Site.

b) There are no federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 ofthe Clean Water Act on the Project Site. According to the JurisdictionalDelineation provided in Appendix D of the DEIR, the Project containsapproximately 7.91 acres of land considered "Waters of the United States"and approximately 21 acres of land considered 'Waters of the State."Development of the Project Site will result in a loss of onsite drainages;accordingly, the Project will require an Individual Clean Water Act Section

16


29/197


30/197


positioned to avoid sensitive sites. Without revealing the location of anyknown prehistoric sites, the signs should explain that natural and culturalresources have significance and must be preserved without damage orvandalism for future generations. This measure shall be implemented tothe satisfaction of the Community Development Director.5-2 uring the initial ground-clearing/grubbing and mass-grading of theproject site, archeological monitoring by a qualified archeologist shall beinitiated. Monitoring shall also occur during the excavation of trenchesand other secondary earthmoving activities. In later stages, limited "spot"monitoring shall be implemented. In the event that cultural resources arediscovered, excavation must be halted in the vicinity of the find and thearcheologist must be notified. Excavation in the area shall not proceeduntil the archeologist has made a determination as to the significance ofthe find and the necessary course of action. This measure shall beimplemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.

3 . upportive RationaleThe DEIR analyzes potential impacts on cultural resources in Section 3.5. For thereasons below, these impacts will be mitigated to less-than-significant levels.

a) A Cultural Resources and Paleontological Assessment prepared for theProject Site by Stantec, Inc. in March 2006 identified one site outside ofthe Project's boundaries that could be potentially eligible for nomination tothe California Register of Historical Resources. The paleontologicalreview found that the Site may have a high potential for uncoveringsignificant fossil resources, but did not reveal any paleontologicalspecimens or strata. There are no known human remains on-site.

b) Mitigation measures will be imposed to protect any unknown or buriedcultural resources encountered during Site development, includingarchaeological or paleontological finds or human remains. In addition tomonitoring activities during construction, the applicant shall install signs atall trailheads explaining the significance of natural and cultural resources;n the Project area.

G. eology and Soils1 . otential ImpactsThe Project would have a significant impact with respect to geology and/or soils if itwould:

a) xpose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

1 8


31/197


rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recentAlquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the StateGeologist for the area or based on the substantial evidence of a knownfault.

strong seismic ground-shaking. seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. landslides.

b) esult in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil;c) be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would becomeunstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in an on- or off-

site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse;be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the UniformBuilding Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property; orhave soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks oralternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not availablefor the disposal of waste water.

2. indingsThe Project will impact geology and soils on a project-specific basis. The Councilmakes the following findings for these impacts:

a) All feasible measures, changes and alterations have been required in, orincorporated into, the Project, which will lessen such significantenvironmental effects.b) With implementation of the following mitigation measures, the Project's

impacts to geology and soils are less than significant.6-1 rior to the issuance of grading permits for Planning Areas 1, 2,and 3, detailed Fault/Seismic Investigations within the areas proposed fordevelopment in the Indio Hills shall be conducted by a State of CaliforniaCertified Engineering Geologist to determine the extent and severity of on-site faulting within those areas. These investigations are to be submittedin conjunction with any tentative tract maps that implement the SpecificPlan. Faults located within the project site are to be regarded as "active"unless determined by these studies. Appropriate fault setbacks and/orengineering controls shall be established within these planning areas foroccupied structures proximate to active faults. All investigations,setbacks, and/or design recommendations shall be identified andimplemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

19


32/197


6-2 rior to issuance of building permits for any planning area, thedeveloper shall demonstrate that all occupied or inhabited structures willbe able to withstand a horizontal seismic acceleration of 1.0 g. Specificdesign-level geotechnical reports shall be prepared by a State ofCalifornia Certified Engineering Geologist for the proposed communitycenter, boutique hotel, club house, bridges, and residential structuresbased on actual plans to determine that these structures meet requireddesign criteria. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction ofthe City Engineer.6-3 rior to the issuance of grading permits for any planning area,further geotechnical studies as recommended in the Fault/SeismicInvestigation (see GSI 2006, p. 63, item 7) shall be conducted by a Stateof California Certified Engineering Geologist to determine the possibilityand extent of severe localized horizontal seismic accelerations due tolocalized and site-specific characteristics. In such cases where site-specific analysis identify potential risks, appropriate foundation or otherdesign solutions, including additional setbacks, shall be implemented toprotect residents and structures against such hazards. All investigationsand solutions shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the CityEngineer.6-4 rior to the issuance of grading permits for planning areas within oradjacent to the Indio Hills, a detailed geotechnical slope stabilityinvestigation shall be performed by a State of California CertifiedEngineering Geologist to determine additional setbacks or other measuresrequired to mitigate potential slope stability hazards. All investigations andany mitigation measures thus derived shall be implemented to thesatisfaction of the City Engineer.6-5 rior to issuance of building permits that involve any above-groundwater feature, tank, or reservoir, appropriate engineering design analysesshall be prepared to address the potential threat of flooding created byseiching during periods of high horizontal seismic acceleration.Appropriate flood control measures adjacent to and downstream of thesefeatures shall also be installed as needed. All investigations and anyengineering and construction measures conducted in response to theserequirements shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.6-6 ll recommendations identified in the site-specific geotechnicalinvestigations specific to this Project conducted by Earth SystemsSouthwest, dated February 18, 2006 (ESS 2006b), and GeoSoils, Inc.,dated March 21, 2006 (GSI 2006) shall be implemented on the projectsite. Those recommendations are found in Section 4 of the ESS 2006breport, pages 62 through 64 of the GSI 2006 report. hoserecommendations shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the CityEngineer. Those recommendations include, but are not necessarilylimited to, the following:

2 0


33/197


a) All structures will be designed for earthquake resistance byan engineer experienced with seismic design in accordance withthe minimum intent of the California Building Code. Such designshould mitigate against such factors as ground subsidence,hydroconsolidation, liquefaction, and other typical geotechnicalconditions; andb) Major underground or above-ground utility lines that crossactive faults will be constructed at high angles approachingperpendicular. Cut-off valves will be located on both sides of thezone of active faulting to facilitate repair or emergency shut-off, aswarranted.

6-7 uring grading and/or construction as needed, the City shall retaina State of California Certified Engineering Geologist to observecompliance with the above mitigation measures and to provide guidanceon any necessary design changes in the event that subsurface conditionsdiffer from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. The CityEngineer or designated representative shall be notified of the anticipatedgrading period prior to grading to facilitate monitoring by the City wheredes i red. he City Engineer or designated representative shall beconsulted regarding any substantial changes during construction.3 . upportive RationaleSection 3.6 of the DEIR analyzes the Project's potential impacts with respect to geologyand/or soils. This analysis is based on studies included as Appendix E of the DEIR,including geotechnical feasibility reports, fault/seismic investigations, and a Phase Ienvironmental site assessment. For the reasons below, these impacts will be mitigatedto less-than-significant levels.

a) The geotechnical investigators and third-party reviewers concurred thatSite development is feasible if necessary mitigation, engineering controlsand designated setback zones are required. Implementation of thosemeasures will minimize the exposure people or structures to potentialsubstantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or deathinvolving fault/seismic activity, unstable soils, liquefaction or landslides.These measures will include design-level investigations prior toconstruction of Project buildings.

b) An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan will be prepared as set forth inMitigation Measure 8-3 to minimize wind or water erosion of exposedso i ls .Soils below the Site are anticipated to possess a very low expansionpotential.

21


34/197


Because the Project will connect to the City's municipal sewer system, itwas not necessary to evaluate impacts to soils from the use of septictanks or alternative waste water disposal systems.

e) he Project is consistent with the City's General Plan Policies Geo-1.1, -'1.2, -1.3, -1.4 and -1.5 due to its incorporation of mitigation measures,design features, engineering controls and designated setback zonesimplemented to guard against seismic hazards.

H. azardous Materials1. otential ImpactsThe Project would have a significant impact related to the potential presence ofhazardous materials, recognized environmental concerns or potential hazards if itwou ld :

a) result in a safety hazard for people residing, working or otherwisecongregating in the Project area; orb) create a significant hazard to the public or the environment throughreasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the

release of hazardous materials into the environment.2. indingsThe potential presence of hazardous materials in the vicinity of the Site will impact theProject. The Council makes the following findings for these impacts:

a) All feasible measures, changes and alterations have been required in, orincorporated into, the Project, which will lessen such significantenvironmental effects.

b) With implementation of the following mitigation measures, the Project'simpacts relating to hazards and hazardous material are less thansignificant.7 -1 rior to site grading, soils in the vicinity of the drainpipe in the southstorage building must be remediated to meet the requirements of theCalifornia Environmental Protection Agency (CEPA). This measure is tobe implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or a qualifiedrepresentative.7-2 ontaminated soils surrounding the above-ground storage tanksmust be removed and/or remediated to meet the requirements of theCEPA. Any soils removed must be disposed of in accordance with

2 2


35/197


applicable laws and regulations. This measure is to be implemented tothe satisfaction of the City Engineer or a qualified representative.7- 3 rior to the initiation of site grading, a State of California CertifiedEngineering Geologist shall conduct a geotechnical survey in those areaswhere organic waste solids from citrus processing and water disposalpractices may have adversely affected the engineering properties of thesoil. If recommended by the geotechnical specialist, grading protocolsand/or other remediation measures must be incorporated into grading andsite preparation procedures for the proposed project. This measure is tobe implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or a qualifiedrepresentative.

-4 f during construction activities on the project site, any discoloredsoil, soils with an unusual odor, or undocumented subsurface structuresare encountered, a qualified soil investigation professional shallinvestigate the soil, and if necessary procure samples for testing. Anycontamination shall be properly remediated to meet the requirements ofthe CEPA. This measure is to be implemented to the satisfaction of theCity Engineer or a qualified representative.7-5 f previously undocumented and abandoned septic tanks, pits orleach lines are uncovered, the Riverside County Department of PublicHealth shall be contacted to coordinate the proper abandonment of thesefeatures. This measure is to be implemented to the satisfaction of the CityEngineer or a qualified representative.7-6 ll spills or leakage of petroleum products during constructionactivities must be remediated in compliance with applicable state and localregulations regarding cleanup and disposal of the contaminant released.The contaminated waste must be collected and disposed of at anappropriately licensed disposal or treatment facility. This measure is to beimplemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or a qualifiedrepresentative.

3 . upportive RationaleSection 3.7 of the DEIR analyzes the potential for soil or groundwater contaminationimpacts arising out of hazardous materials present on or near the Property. Thisanalysis is based on the Project site-specific Phase I Environmental Site AssessmentUpdate, dated January 10, 2006 ("Phase I"), included as Appendix F of the DEIR. Forthe reasons below, these impacts will be mitigated to less-than-significant levels.

a) he Phase I, which includes the results of previous Phase IIenvironmental investigations at the Site, identifies several relatively minorexisting environmental conditions. These conditions can be remediatedusing commonly applied remediation techniques, if necessary. As setforth in the above mitigation measures, this remediation will be completed2 3


36/197


to applicable government standards prior to development of the Site.Accordingly, the identified environmental conditions will not pose a safetyhazard for people residing, working or otherwise congregating in theProject area.

b) imited quantities and types of hazardous materials would be used duringProject construction by trained professionals. Following construction, onlysmall amounts of hazardous materials commonly associated withresidences will be used at the Site, and a water quality management plan("WQMP") will be implemented pursuant to Mitigation Measure 8-3 toprotect water quality from improper handling of those hazardous materials.Accordingly, the construction and operation of the Project is notanticipated to create a significant hazard to the public or the environmentthrough reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involvingthe release of hazardous materials into the environment.

c) ecause the identified environmental conditions will be remediated prior todevelopment if necessary, the Project is consistent with the City's GeneralPlan Goal HM-1 and Policies HM-1.2 and -1.5, which seek to protectpublic health safety and welfare by ensuring the proper transportation anddisposal of hazardous wastes, and prevention of soil and watercontamination.

I. ydrology and Water Quality1. otential ImpactsThe Project would have a significant impact on hydrology and/or water quality if it would:

a) violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements;b) substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially withgroundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifervolume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the

production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level whichwould not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permitshave been granted);substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in amanner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or offsite;

d) ubstantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, orsubstantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a mannerwhich would result in flooding on or offsite;2 4


37/197


create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity ofexisting or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantialadditional sources of polluted runoff;

f) otherwise substantially degrade water quality;g) place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federalFlood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Maps ("FIRM") or otherflood hazard delineation map;h) expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or deathinvolving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee ordam; ori) result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

2 . indingsThe Project will impact hydrology and water quality on a project-specific basis. TheCouncil makes the following findings for this impact:

a) All feasible measures, changes and alterations have been required in, orincorporated into, the Project, which will lessen such significantenvironmental effects.b) With implementation of the following mitigation measures, the Project'simpacts to hydrology and water quality are less than significant.

8-1 rior to issuance of grading permits, the developer or its designeeshall coordinate the design and obtain approval of all flood control andstorm drain structures as identified in the project hydrology studies. Thedeveloper or designee shall provide evidence of this approval to the CityPublic Works Department. These improvements shall be consistent withany master planning efforts of the CVWD.8-2 he developer or its designee shall obtain a General Permit forStorm Water Discharge Associated with Construction Activity(Construction Activity General Permit). The developer or designee shallprovide a copy of this permit to the City Public Works Department prior tothe issuance of grading permits.8-3 rior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer or itsdesignee shall prepare a Water Quality Management Plan ("WQMP") andan Erosion and Sediment Control Plan ("ESCP") to implement the mostappropriate best management practices ("BMPs") and to prevent anysignificant removal and/or downstream deposition of soil from the projectsite during construction. The WQMP and ESCP shall contain provisionsrequiring that all erosion control measures and structures be maintained

2 5


38/197


and repaired as needed for the life of the project. Prior to the issuance ofa grading permit, the City Public Works Department shall approve theWQMP and ESCP based on review and input by the Regional WaterQuality Control Board ("RWQCB"). At the request of the developer, theCity Public Works Department may accept a Storm Water PollutionPrevention Plan ("SWPPP") as a substitute for the ESCP as long as itfulfills the intent of this measure to an equivalent degree. The SWPPP orESCP shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Public WorksDepartment. The WQMP and ESCP or SWPPP shall include, but is notlimited to, the following:

a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimizesoil exposure to winter rain periods experienced in SouthernCalifornia;

b) The natural vegetation shall be retained on all areas that willnot be disturbed for grading, except areas that must becleared and revegetated as part of a fuel modificationprogram;

c) All slopes greater than five feet in height shall be evaluatedto define the optimum length and steepness to minimize flowvelocity and erosion potential. Lateral drainage collectionsystems shall be incorporated at the base of slopes, whendetermined appropriate, to transport flows in a controlled,non-erodable channel;

d) Indicate where flows on the site can be diverted fromdenuded areas and carried in the natural channels on thesite;e) Construct man-made channels to minimize runoff velocities;f) Disturbed areas shall be vegetated and mulchedimmediately after final grades have been established;g) Sediment traps, basins, or barriers (silt fences, hay bales,etc.) shall be established on the property to prevent the

release of "first flush" urban pollutants, including sediment,from developed areas, including the emergency accessroads. The design and location of these improvements shallbe identified in the plan subject to review and approval bythe City;

h) Drainage facilities designed to transport flows shall bedescribed and the adequacy of the channel shall be verifiedby City approval of a detailed drainage analysis;

26


39/197


i) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included toensure that any erosion, which does occur either on oroffsite as a result of the project, will be corrected through aremediation or restoration program within a time framespecified by the City;

j) Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the City shallidentify a bond amount for implementing the erosion controlprogram and the developer or designee shall provide theCity with a bond for this amount; andk) Confirmed observations by the City of uncontrolled runoffbeing carried onsite will be grounds for suspension or

revocation of any grading or building permit in process, orany discretionary permit subsequently applied for until theproblem is resolved to the satisfaction of the City PublicWorks Department.

8-4 rior to the issuance of building permits, graded but undevelopedland shall be maintained in a relatively weed-free condition and/or plantedwith interim landscaping within 90 days of completion of grading, unlessbuilding permits are obtained.8-5 rior to the issuance of occupancy permits, planting of developedland shall comply with the NPDES Best Management PracticesConstruction Handbook Section 6.2.8-6 rior to issuance of the first occupancy permit, the developer or itsdesignee shall provide proof to the Public Works Department that theonsite drainage facilities will be maintained by the County, City, HOA, orequivalent. The developer must demonstrate that these facilities will beadequately maintained by an appropriate mechanism or organization, tothe satisfaction of the City Public Works Department.8-7 rior to construction of the golf course, the developer or itsdesignee shall demonstrate that the irrigation system(s) for the golf coursecan accommodate reclaimed water in the future once it is available to thesite. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the CityPublic Works Director.

3 . upportive RationaleThe Project's potential impacts on hydrology and water quality are analyzed in Section3.8 of the DEIR. This analysis is based on the preliminary hydrology report and watersupply assessment, included in Appendix G of the DEIR, and on the jurisdictionaldelineation report, included in Appendix D of the DEIR. For the reasons below, theseimpacts will be mitigated to less-than-significant levels.

27


40/197


41/197


b) conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of anagency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to thegeneral plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect;or

c) conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communityconservation plan.2. indingsThe Project will impact land use and planning on a project-specific basis. The Councilmakes the following findings for this impact:

a) All feasible measures, changes and alterations have been required in, orincorporated into, the Project, which will lessen such significantenvironmental effects.b) With implementation of the following mitigation measures, the Project's

impacts to land use are less than significant.9-1 uring the finalization of a contract for the sale of any real propertywithin the Citrus Ranch project site, the seller shall make full and completedisclosure of the existence of any mining operations in the vicinity of thedevelopment. uch disclosure shall require the buyer's writtenacknowledgement of said notice. This disclosure and acknowledgementshall be retained and recorded in perpetuity as part of the residential salescontract. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of theDirector of Community Development.

3 . upportive RationaleThe DEIR analyses the Project's potential land use and planning impacts in Section 3.9.For the reasons below, the potential impacts on land use and planning can be mitigatedto less-than-significant levels.

a) The CRSP does not physically divide an established community.b) The DEIR's analysis included a review of the Project's consistency with

goals and policies of the City's General Plan and Housing Element Updateas well as the County's General Plan and General Plan Draft ProgramEIR. n addition, Section 5.1 of the DEIR analyzed the Project'sconsistency with the plans and policies of the Southern CaliforniaAssociation of Governments ("SCAG"). he applicable goals andobjectives from the Community Development section of the City's GeneralPlan were considered against the land use designations proposed for the29 residential planning areas proposed for the Project. The Project is

29


42/197


consistent with the planning goals and policies of the City, which will havejurisdiction over the Project upon annexation of the Project Site. Further,the Project will be consistent with the City's General Plan and applicablezoning requirements after approval of the necessary entitlements.

c) As discussed above in Section IX(E) Biological Resources, the Projectdoes not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or naturalcommunity conservation plan.d) Written comments were provided in response to the NOP and DEIR byoperators of mining facilities located in the vicinity of the Site. Thesecomments requested a mitigation measure requiring full and completedisclosure of the existence of the mining operations to potential buyers ofresidences in the CRSP. Mitigation Measure 9-1 will be implemented toaddress these comments.

K. ineral Resources1 . otential ImpactsThe Project would have a significant impact on mineral resources if it would:

a) result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would beof value to the region and the residents of the state; orb) result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resourcerecovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other landuse plan.

2 . indingsThe operation of the Project will create a significant and unavoidable impact on mineralresources on a project-specific basis. The Council makes the following findings for thisimpact:

a) No feasible measures exist to mitigate these significant and unavoidableimpacts to mineral resources.

b) For the reasons set forth below in the Statement of OverridingConsiderations, adopted concurrently by the Council, the Council findsthat the significant impact identified in this Section IX (K) is acceptable inlight of the Project's overall benefits.

30


43/197


3 . upportive RationaleThe DEIR analyzes impacts to mineral resources in Section 3.10. This analysisincluded review of the California Department of Conservation's Special Report 159Regarding Aggregate Materials in the Palms Springs Production Consumption Regionand the City's General Plan. For the following reasons, no feasible measures exist thatcould mitigate these impacts to a less-than-significant level.

a) The DEIR notes that the bulk of the CRSP Site does not contain mineralresources in quantities sufficient to be considered to be significant ifunavailable for extraction. However, the northern portion of the Sitecontains known mineral reserves; the development of the CRSP will be asignificant impact because it will result in the loss of availability of thoseresources.

b) In addition, development of the northern portion of the CRSP Site willresult in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resources,delineated as an MRZ-2 zone on the Mineral Land Classification Mapgenerated by the California Geological Survey. Accordingly, any feasiblealternative for development (other than a mining operation) on thenorthern portion of the CRSP Site will result in a significant impact and willbe inconsistent with the City's General Plan Goal MR-1 and Policies MR-.1 and -1.4, designed to conserve mineral resources for future extraction.

c) Significant additional quantities of mineral resources are available forextraction from other properties in the vicinity of the Project Site. Existingmining operators have filed applications or have otherwise indicated theirintent to expand their operations onto these off-site properties.Accordingly, development of the Project will not impact availability ofsignificant quantities of mineral resources in the area.L. oise

1. otential ImpactsThe Project would have a significant noise impact if it:

a) created exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess ofstandards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, orapplicable standards of other agencies;b) created exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbornevibration or groundborne noise levels;c) created a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in theproject vicinity above levels existing without the project;

31


44/197


d) created a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noiselevels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project;e) was located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has notbeen adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,which would expose people residing or working in the project area toexcessive noise levels; or1) as within the vicinity of a private airstrip, which would the project expose

people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.2. indingsThe Project will have noise impacts on a project-specific basis. The Council makes thefollowing findings for this impact:

a) All feasible measures, changes and alterations have been required in, orincorporated into, the Project, which will lessen such significantenvironmental effects.b) With implementation of the following mitigation measures, the Project'snoise impacts are less than significant.

11-1 During all project site excavation and grading on-site, theconstruction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed ormobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent withthe manufacturers' standards. Construction contractors shall place allstationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed awayfrom the noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site. This measureshall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community DevelopmentDirector.11-2 The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areasthat will create the greatest distance between construction-related noisesources and noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site during allproject construction. his measure shall be implemented to thesatisfaction of the Community Development Director.11-3 The construction contractor shall limit all construction-relatedactivities that would result in high noise levels according to theconstruction hours to be determined by City staff. City of India limitsconstruction to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Mondaythrough Saturday. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfactionof the Community Development Director.11-4 The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to thesame hours specified for construction equipment. To the extent feasible,haul routes shall not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings.

3 2


45/197


This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the CommunityDevelopment Director.11-5 The project proponent shall ensure that all homebuyers receivedisclosures that identify that construction of subsequent phases willexpose the existing home to construction noise. he proposeddisclosures shall be approved by City staff prior to the issuance of the firstoccupancy permit. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfactionof the Community Development Director.11-6 Residences in planning areas adjacent to Dillon Road shall besetback to a distance determined by the noise analyst or a noise barriershall be constructed to specifications determined by the noise analyst andagreed upon by the City Engineer. These specifications shall bedetermined after the grading plan is complete but prior to the issuance ofgrading permits. The setback distance or noise barrier shall be sufficientto ensure that the exterior noise level at any residential development doesnot exceed 65 dBA CNEL. This measure shall be implemented to thesatisfaction of the Community Development Director.

3 . upportive RationaleThe Project's noise impacts are analyzed in Section 3.11 of the DEIR. The analysiswas based on the Citrus Ranch EIR Noise Impact Analysis, by Urban Crossroads datedOctober 5, 2005, and a Peer Review of that report by Michael Brandman Associates,dated February 2, 2006, included as Appendix H of the DEIR. For the reasons below,noise impacts can be mitigated to less-than-significant levels.

a) he noise analysis report evaluated construction and operation noiseagainst the City's exterior noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL (A-weighteddecibels as Community Noise Equivalent Level). Construction noise couldcreate short-term, intermittent exceedances of this standard within theProject Site. peration of the Pr

citrus ranch city approval jan 17, 2007

Documents