Loading...
2018 09 25 PCPLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA 1 SEPTEMBER 25, 2018 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta REGULAR MEETING on TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2018 AT 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL: Commissioners Bettencourt, Caldwell, Currie, Proctor, Quill, Wright and Chairperson McCune. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA At this time, members of the public may address the Planning Commission on any matter not listed on the agenda. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. The Planning Commission values your comments; however, in accordance with State law, no action shall be taken on any item not appearing on the agenda unless it is an emergency item authorized by GC 54954.2(b). CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA ANNOUNCEMENTS, PRESENTATIONS AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS – None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVE MINUTES DATED SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 BUSINESS SESSION - None PUBLIC HEARINGS Declarations regarding Public Contacts. 1. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 SUBMITTED BY BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. PROPOSING THE DEVELOPMENT OF 82 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON 20.8 ACRES. PROJECT: FLORESTAS. CEQA: PREVIOUSLY ANALYZED UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2014-638 AND PROJECT IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS THAT PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED, CONDITIONS Planning Commission agendas and staff reports are now available on the City’s web page: www.laquintaca.org PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA 2 SEPTEMBER 25, 2018 HAVE NOT CHANGED, PROPOSED PROJECT WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE MITIGATION MEASURES IMPOSED IN EA 2014-638 AND NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED. LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND AVENUE 52. [RESOLUTION NO. 2018-011] 2. SPECIFIC PLAN 2018-0001, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2018-0001 SUBMITTED BY CCD HOTEL AND RESORTS LLC PROPOSING A 160-ROOM HOTEL, 8,849 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND A 25,778 SQUARE-FOOT INDOOR FOOD MARKET TO THE EXISTING JEFFERSON SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER: PROJECT: JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL. CEQA: THE DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS PREPARED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2018-0001 FOR THIS PROJECT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND HAS DETERMINED THAT ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THERE WILL NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT BECAUSE MITIGATION MEASURES HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT. LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE. [RESOLUTION NO. 2018-012] REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - None COMMISSIONERS’ ITEMS STAFF ITEMS - None ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be held on October 9, 2018, commencing at 6:00 p.m. at the City Hall Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California. DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Wanda Wise-Latta, Commission Secretary, do hereby declare that the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber at 78-495 Calle Tampico, and the bulletin boards at 78- 630 Highway 111, and the La Quinta Cove Post Office at 51-321 Avenida Bermudas, on September 20, 2018. DATED: September 20, 2018 WANDA WISE-LATTA, Commission Secretary City of La Quinta, California Public Notices The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the Planning Division of the Design and Development Department at 777- 7118, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA 3 SEPTEMBER 25, 2018 If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the Planning Division of the Design and Development Department at 777-7118. A one (1) week notice is required. If background material is to be presented to the Commission during a Planning Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Executive Assistant for distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the meeting. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Commission regarding any item(s) on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the Design and Development Department’s counter at City Hall located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253, during normal business hours. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 1 SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chairperson McCune. PRESENT: Commissioners Bettencourt, Currie, Proctor, Quill, Wright and Chairperson McCune. ABSENT: Commissioner Caldwell STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Gabriel Perez, City Engineer Bryan McKinney, Senior Planner Cheri L. Flores, Associate Planner Carlos Flores, Commission Secretary Wanda Wise-Latta and Administrative Assistant Mirta Lerma A moment of silence was observed in memory of the anniversary of 9/11. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Bettencourt led the Pledge of Allegiance. PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA - None CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA – confirmed ANNOUNCEMENTS, PRESENTATIONS AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Planning Manager Gabriel Perez introduced Design and Development Director Danny Castro. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES DATED JULY 24, 2018 MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Proctor to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended. Motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS – None BUSINESS SESSION - None CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 2 SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 STUDY SESSION 1. HIGHWAY 111 CORRIDOR STUDY Senior Planner Cheri L. Flores presented the staff report, which is on file in the Design and Development Department. Planning Commission discussed the 2015 Greater Palm Springs Convention and Visitor’s Bureau Visitor Survey regarding the La Quinta tourist parties retail expenditures; vacant land along Jefferson Street in Indio; housing; and inquired about shopping center owners’ reactions to the Highway 111 Corridor Study. Staff shared comments received from corridor property owners or their retail representatives. Commission discussion continued about restrictions regarding entertainment establishments in certain shopping centers’ CC&R’s; economic viability of the Highway 111 Corridor; potential “retailtainment” use; CV Link; big box vacancies; pedestrian districts; landscaping; shade; and apartment housing. Staff said that a Joint Study Session of the City Council and Planning Commission will be scheduled on October 2, 2018 to address the next stage of the Highway 111 Corridor visioning. REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS – None COMMISSIONERS’ ITEMS - None STAFF ITEMS 1. VILLAGE PARKING STUDY Associate Planner Carlos Flores presented the staff report, which is on file in the Design and Development Department. Several Planning Commissioners concurred that the parking surveys provided important data and monitoring should continue. 2. Staff suggested that future Planning Commission agendas include the opportunity for Commissioners to disclose ex parte conversations prior to public hearings. 3. Staff advised the Planning Commission that two public hearings will be scheduled for the September 25, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. 4. Staff updated the Planning Commission regarding the appeal of Conditional Use Permit 2018-0003 for a 65-foot monopalm cell tower and associated ground equipment PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 3 SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 located east of Eisenhower Drive and Avenida Montezuma intersection in the La Quinta Community Park which was approved bythe Planning Commission on July 24, 2018. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Proctor/Currie to adjourn at 6:41 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, WANDA WISE-LATTA, Commission Secretary City of La Quinta, California Page 1 of 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE:SEPTEMBER 25, 2018 CASE NO.:SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 APPLICANT:BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. PROPERTY OWNER:BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. REQUEST:ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF 82 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON 20.8 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND AVENUE 52 CEQA:THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PREVIOUSLY ANALYZED THIS PROJECT UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2014-638. THE PROJECT IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS THAT PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED, CONDITIONS HAVE NOT CHANGED, THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE MITITGATION MEASURES IMPOSED IN EA2014-638, AND THE DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED LOCATION:NORTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND AVENUE 52 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution approving Site Development Permit 2018-0002 to allow the development of 82 single-family homes on 20.8 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant received approval by Council of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Specific Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Permit (SDP) for the site in March of 2015. Subsequently, the Tract Map was recorded, demolition of previous buildings was completed, and site-wide improvements initiated. The applicant stopped work on the site, and it has been in its current condition for approximately 2 years. The applicant did not request an extension of the SDP and it lapsed in 2017. The applicant has resubmitted essentially the same Site Development Permit for review. The project includes PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 Page 2 of 5 82 single-story homes, as well as a central recreation area, pedestrian paseos and a primary access at the existing gate on Avenue 52. Changes include the addition of a secondary access on Jefferson Street, and changes in the architectural design of the homes. BACKGROUND The Watermark Villas project was originally approved in 2004. The project consisted of 250 condominium units on the same 20.8-acre site. The project included two-story, 8-plex buildings with underground parking, multiple pools and spas, tennis courts, a clubhouse building and restaurant and a shop and office. Although some construction occurred on the site, it was abandoned during the recession. The applicant purchased the property and proposed to convert the multi-family land use designation to Low Density Residential and develop a standard single-family home subdivision on the site. Those approvals were secured in 2015. The General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and Specific Plan Amendment were finalized and do not expire. The Tract Map was recorded, so that the lots in the subdivision are now legal lots. The Site Development Permit had a two-year time frame for the initiation of construction. Because no building construction was initiated, and the applicant failed to extend the permit, it lapsed in 2017. The applicant proposes essentially the same site design, architecture and landscaping plans as were approved in 2015. Changes have been made to the floor plans and elevations and are described below. The siting of the homes on the lots is controlled by the recorded Tract Map, which sets the boundaries for each lot. The only other change proposed by the applicant is the addition of a secondary access driveway onto Jefferson Street, which had previously been designated for emergency access only. PROPOSAL & ANALYSIS The applicant proposes essentially the same site design, architecture and landscaping plans as were approved in 2015. Changes have been made to the floor plans and elevations as described below. The siting of the homes on the lots is controlled by the recorded Tract Map, which sets the boundaries for each lot. The only other change proposed by the applicant is the addition of a secondary access driveway onto Jefferson Street, which was previously designated for emergency access only. Overview: The proposed project will include 82 single-family homes on lots ranging from 6,000 to 10,000 square feet. The homes will range in size from 2,338 to 2,508 square feet for three models (Model 1, 2, 3) and up to 3,009 square feet for Model 1X, which adds a second floor to Model 1. Page 3 of 5 A common recreation area is proposed opposite the entry. It will consist of a pool and spa, pool building with restrooms and turf areas on 0.8 acres. Parking for the recreation area is provided from the cul-de-sac to north, and from the primary loop road to the south. The retention basin in the southwest corner of the property will be landscaped and will include a perimeter walking path for residents, and an access road within an existing CVWD easement on the southwest corner. Site Design: The project site abuts the Citrus on its north and west sides. The proposed project will result in a standard subdivision on a looped street. The previously proposed golf cart access way to the Citrus project is shown on the site plan, but is not included in the applicant’s project description. The primary access point will be from the existing entry on Avenue 52. The access driveway on the northeast corner of the property to Jefferson Street previously approved for emergency access only is proposed to be modified by the applicant to allow egress for residents. The City’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the design and is comfortable that adequate sight lines and distances are provided at this location. The proposed project is still subject to the requirements of the previously approved Specific Plan and conforms with these requirements. The residential lots are generally between 6,000 and 7,000 square feet, somewhat smaller than the City’s standard of 7,200 square feet. The front and rear yard setbacks are also shallower than the City’s standard, at 10’ each, while the Low Density Residential (RL) standard is 20’. The grading required for this site results in the homes being located at a considerably lower elevation than the Citrus Club to the north and west as shown on page 5 of Attachment 2 (Alternate Retaining Wall Plan, Lots 9-27). In order to assure these homes have useable back yards, the applicant designed retaining walls that will allow a flat rear yard, bordered by a garden retaining wall for lots 9 through 27. In addition, these homes are required to be single story and cannot have Plan 1X constructed on them, in order to protect the privacy of Citrus residents. A central recreation area will include a pool facility and clubhouse, in an area of about 35,000 square feet. Open turf is proposed to the west and east of the pool area. A condition of approval to require the inclusion of picnic tables and benches to the turfed areas is included in the attached conditions of approval, as it was in the previous proposal. Architectural Design: The proposed project’s architecture is of Spanish influence. There will be three floor plans ranging in size from 2,338 to 2,508 square feet, each with three elevations. To relieve the concern with monotony raised by the Planning Page 4 of 5 Commission and City Council over the previous SDP, the 11 different color palettes added previously are currently proposed as well (see last two pages of Attachment 2). All the homes have front loaded 2-car garages, with one model having an additional, tandem garage space for golf carts. The homes are generally one story, but one plan (Plan 1X) has a second story option, which increases the total square footage to 3,000 square feet. Building heights range from 16 to 19 feet. The architectural style is simple and unarticulated, particularly on the sides and rear of the homes. Building articulation previously provided on model 1 and 1X has been removed from this submittal, and some floor plan modifications have been made. The changes from the previous approval are shown for each floor plan in Attachment 2, and identified with a red “bubble” outline on pages AI-2, AI-3, AI-5, AI-6, AI-7, AI-8, AI-10, AI-11, AI-12, AI-13, AI-14, AI-15, AI-16, A3-2, A3-4 and A3-6 (the first of each page shows the current proposal, and the second shows the red “bubble” outline of the area where a change is proposed). At staff’s request, the applicant has broken the roof line on plans 1 and 1X to vary roof lines. Accents fall into three categories: precast stone finished columns and surrounds; rusticated foam wood finishes; and decorative ceramic tile. Some of the models also include composite shutters. Roofs are proposed to be concrete tile. Three color palettes are proposed, all in earth tones from light to dark hues. The Architectural Landscape Review Board (ALRB) at the time felt that the color palette for the homes was bland and added a condition of approval that additional color options be added to the three models. These additional color scheme were provided by the applicant and are still included in the current plan (see last two pages of Attachment 2, unnumbered). The Conditions of Approval also reflect the previous approval’s requirement that all eaves be a minimum of 12 inches beyond the wall plane, to improve the appearance of the homes, and that additional architectural enhancements be provided for all homes abutting the Citrus Club. The pool building (last two pages of the Exhibit book, un-numbered), is also proposed to be single story. French doors are proposed on two sides, while the “left” and rear elevations are unadorned. Landscaping: The landscaping palette for the proposed project consists of standard desert species, including Palo Verde, Mesquite and Olive trees, agave, aloe, bougainvillea and lantana. Landscaping will be provided in each front yard, on all common areas, and in the retention basin. The perimeter landscaping will be enhanced with a double row of date palms (10’ height) at the corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street. Date palms will also accent the entry and flank the pool area. The project has been conditioned to comply with the City’s water efficient landscaping standards. The same conditions of approval relating to the size of trees have been included in this permit as were required in the original Page 5 of 5 approval. These require that the Rhus Lancia be increased from the 24” box proposed in the plans (page L-5 ff., Attachment 2) to 36” box, and that all trees except Rhus Lancia be multi-trunk. AGENCY & PUBLIC REVIEW: Public Agency Review: This request was sent to all applicable City departments and affected public agencies. All written comments received are on file and available for review with the Community Development Department. All applicable comments have been adequately addressed and/or incorporated in the recommended Conditions of Approval. Public Notice: This project was advertised in The Desert Sun newspaper on September 14, 2018 and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site. To date, no comments have been received from adjacent property owners. Any written comments received will be handed out at the Planning Commission hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Design & Development Department determined that the project was previously studied under Environmental Assessment 2014-638. At that time, the Department prepared an Initial Study, and determined that although the project had the potential to generate significant environmental effects; mitigation measures imposed on the project would reduce these effects to a less than significant level. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved. The project is substantially the same as that previously studied, and conditions in the natural and built environment have not changed. The project will be subject to the mitigation measures imposed by EA 2014-638, and no further environmental review is required. Prepared by: Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Planner Approved by: Gabriel Perez, Planning Manager Attachments: 1. Project Information Sheet 2. Site Development Permit Booklet PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2018 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002, ALLOWING THE DEVELOPMENT OF 82 HOMES ON 20.8 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND AVENUE 52 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 APPLICANT: BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. PROJECT: FLORESTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 25th day of September, 2018, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Beazer Homes Holdings for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for the development of 82 single- family homes within the Watermark Specific Plan (SP 2003-069, as amended); and WHEREAS, the Design and Development Department published the public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on the 14th day of September, as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Municipal Code to justify approval of said Site Development Permit: 1. Consistency with the General Plan The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan, as it proposes 82 single family homes on 20.8 acres, consistent with the Low Density Residential land use designation. 2. Consistency with the Zoning Code The proposed project is consistent with the Zoning Code and Specific Plan 2003-069, Amendment #1, and complies with the development standards specified in both of these documents. 3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The Design & Development Department determined that the project was previously studied under Environmental Assessment 2014-638. At that time, the Department prepared an Initial Study, and determined that although the project had the potential to generate significant environmental effects; mitigation measures imposed on the project would reduce these effects to a less than significant level. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2018- Site Development Permit 2018-0002 Beazer Homes Holdings Corp. – Floresta Adopted: Page 2 of 3 The project is substantially the same as that previously studied, and conditions in the natural and built environment have not changed. The project will be subject to the mitigation measures imposed by EA 2014-638, and no further environmental review is required. 4. Architectural Design The architecture and layout of the project is compatible with, and not detrimental to, the homes in the Citrus development to the north and west of the project, as conditioned. 5. Landscape Design The landscaping plans are consistent with the City’s standards and will be required to comply with the City’s water efficient landscaping requirements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: SECTION 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the Findings of the Planning Commission in this case; SECTION 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2018-0002, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Exhibit A (Conditions of Approval). PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this the 25th day of September, 2018, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ___________________________ KEVIN MCCUNE, Chairperson City of La Quinta, California Planning Commission Resolution No. 2018- Site Development Permit 2018-0002 Beazer Homes Holdings Corp. – Floresta Adopted: Page 3 of 3 ATTEST: ____________________________ GABRIEL PEREZ, Planning Manager City of La Quinta, California RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 1 of 20 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (“City”), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. The Site Development Permit shall expire two years after its approval and shall become null and void in accordance with La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.200.080, unless a building permit has been issued. A time extension may be requested per LQMC Section 9.200.080. 3. Site Development Permit 2018-0002 shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation measures for the following related approval(s): Tentative Tract Map 36762 Specific Plan 03-069, Amendment No.1 Environmental Assessment 2014-638 In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of these approvals, the Planning Manager shall adjudicate the conflict by determining the precedence. 4. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies, if required: x Riverside County Fire Marshal x La Quinta Public Works Development Division (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works Clearance) for Building Permits, Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) Exemption Form – Whitewater River Region, Improvement Permit) x La Quinta Planning Division x Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 2 of 20 x Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) x Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) x Imperial Irrigation District (IID) x California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) x State Water Resources Control Board x SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) x South Coast Air Quality Management District Coachella Valley (SCAQMD) The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When these requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvement plans for City approval. 5. Coverage under the State of California Construction General Permit must be obtained by the applicant, who then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s (“RWQCB”) acknowledgment of the applicant’s Notice of Intent (“NOI”) and Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number to the City prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City’s NPDES stormwater discharge permit, LQMC Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; the California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Colorado River Basin Region Board Order No. R7- 2013-0011 and the State Water Resources Control Board’s Order No. 2012- 0006-DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (“SWPPP”) to the State Water Resources Control Board. The applicant or design professional can obtain the California Stormwater Quality Association SWPPP template at www.cabmphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation. B. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 3 of 20 inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. C. The applicant’s SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practices (“BMPs”) (LQMC Section 8.70.020 (Definitions)): 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non-Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. D. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading, pursuant to this project. E. The SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City Council. F. The inclusion in the Homeowners’ Association (HOA) Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&Rs), a requirement for the perpetual maintenance and operation of all post-construction BMPs as required and the applicant shall execute and record an agreement that provides for the perpetual maintenance and operation of all post-construction BMPs as required. 7. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Development Impact Fee and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee programs in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). 8. Approval of this Site Development Permit shall not be construed as approval for any horizontal dimensions implied by any site plans or exhibits unless specifically identified in the following conditions of approval. 9. Developer shall reimburse the City, within thirty (30) days of present of the invoice, all costs and actual attorney’s fees incurred by the City Attorney to review, negotiate and/or modify any documents or instruments required by these conditions, if Developer requests that the City modify or revise any RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 4 of 20 documents or instruments prepared initially by the City to effect these conditions. This obligation shall be paid in the time noted above without deduction or offset and Developer’s failure to make such payment shall be a material breach of the Conditions of Approval. 10. Developer shall reimburse the City, within thirty (30) days of presentment of the invoice, all costs and actual consultant’s fees incurred by the City for engineering and/or surveying consultants to review and/or modify any documents or instruments required by this project. This obligation shall be paid in the time noted above without deduction or offset and Developer’s failure to make such payment shall be a material breach of the Conditions of Approval. PROPERTY RIGHTS 11. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 12. Pursuant to the aforementioned condition, conferred rights shall include approvals from the master developer or the HOA over easements and other property rights necessary for construction and proper functioning of the proposed development not limited to access rights over proposed and/or existing private streets that access public streets and open space/drainage facilities of the master development. 13. The applicant shall retain for private use of all private street rights-of-way in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 14. The applicant shall offer for dedication a ten-foot wide public utility easement contiguous with, and along both sides of all private streets. Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written approval of IID. 15. The applicant shall maintain existing perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public rights-of-way as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 5 of 20 A. Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. B. Jefferson Street (Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately-owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes. 16. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 17. Direct vehicular access to Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 from lots with frontage along Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street is restricted, except for those access points identified on the Site Development Permit, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. 18. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 19. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access for Individual Properties and Development) for public streets; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 20. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations that will convey water without ponding, and provide lateral containment of dust and residue during street sweeping operations. If a wedge or rolled curb design is approved, the lip at the flowline shall be near vertical with a 1/8" batter and a minimum height of 0.1'. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 6 of 20 restored to standard curb height prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. 21. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). A. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Private Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line shall have a 36-foot travel width. 2) Private Alleys and Emergency Fire Access (Lots H, I, J, K, and M) – Shall be constructed according to the lay-out shown on the Site Development Permit with on-street parking prohibited and the applicant establishes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the parking restriction in the CC&R’s. 3) The location of driveways of corner lots shall not be located within the curb return and away from the intersection when possible. 22. All gated entries shall provide for a three-car minimum stacking capacity for inbound traffic to be a minimum length of 62 feet from call box to the street; and shall provide for a full turn-around outlet for non-accepted vehicles. Where a gated entry is proposed, the applicant shall submit a detailed exhibit at a scale of 1" = 10', demonstrating that those passenger vehicles that do not gain entry into the development can safely make a full turn-around (minimum radius to be 24 feet) out onto the main street from the gated entry. Pursuant to said condition, there shall be a minimum of twenty five feet width provided at the turn-around opening provided. Two lanes of traffic shall be provided on the entry side of each gated entry, one lane shall be dedicated for residents, and one lane for visitors. The two travel lanes shall be a minimum of 20 feet of total paved roadway surface or as approved by the Fire Department. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, standard knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 7 of 20 the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer. 23. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site-specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Residential 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. Primary Arterial 4.5" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. Major Arterial 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 24. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 25. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Jefferson Street – Emergency Fire Access and Residence Egress Only Access: Right turn out is permitted. Right turn in, left turn in, and left turn out movements are prohibited. B. Avenue 52 – Primary Entry: Right turn in, right turn out and left turn in movements are permitted. Left turn movements out are prohibited. 26. The applicant shall construct improvements including appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks. Mid-block street lighting is not required. 27. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 8 of 20 approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by engineers registered in California. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as “engineer,” “surveyor,” and “architect,” refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 28. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans). 29. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Design and Development Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. On-Site Rough Grading Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal B. PM10 Plan 1” = 40’ Horizontal C. WQMP (Plan submitted in Report Form) NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently. D. On-Site Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal, 1"= 4' Vertical (Separate Storm Drain Plans if applicable) E. On-Site Residential Precise Grading Plan 1" = 30' Horizontal Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 9 of 20 All On-Site Signing & Striping Plans shall show, at a minimum; Stop Signs, Limit Lines and Legends, No Parking Signs, Raised Pavement Markers (including Blue RPMs at fire hydrants) and Street Name Signs per Public Works Standard Plans and/or as approved by the Design and Development Department. “Rough Grading” plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. In addition to the normal set of improvement plans, a “Site Development” plan is required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official, Planning Manager, and the City Engineer. “Site Development” plans shall normally include all on-site surface improvements including but not limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, wall elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements. “Street Parking” plan shall include appropriate signage to implement the “No Parking” concept, or alternatively an on-street parking policy shall be included in the CC&R’s subject to City Engineer’s Approval. The parking plan or CC&R’s shall be submitted concurrently with the Street Improvement Plans. 30.The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the “Plans, Notes and Design Guidance” section of the Design and Development Department at the City website (www.laquintaca.gov). Please navigate to the Design and Development Department home page and look for the Standard Drawings hyperlink. 31. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer (currently mylars). 32. Upon completion of construction, and prior to final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all approved RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 10 of 20 mylars previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as-built conditions. The applicant shall employ or retain the Engineer of Record during the construction phase of the project so that the EOR can make site visits in support of preparing "Record Drawing". However, if subsequent approved revisions have been approved by the City Engineer and reflect said "Record Drawing" conditions, the Engineer of Record may submit a letter attesting to said fact to the City Engineer in lieu of mylar submittal. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY 33. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation. When improvements are phased through a “Phasing Plan,” or an administrative approval (e.g., Site Development Permits), all off-site improvements and common on-site improvements (e.g., backbone utilities, retention basins, perimeter walls, landscaping and gates) shall be constructed, or secured, prior to the issuance of any permits in the first phase of the development, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each subsequent phase shall either be completed, or secured, prior to the completion of homes or the occupancy of permanent buildings within such latter phase, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. In the event the applicant fails to construct the improvements for the development, or fails to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, pursuant to the approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of all permits, and/or final inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. 34. Depending on the timing of the development of this Site Development Permit, and the status of the off-site improvements at the time, the applicant may be required to: A. Construct certain off-site improvements. B. Construct additional off-site improvements, subject to the RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 11 of 20 reimbursement of its costs by others. C. Reimburse others for those improvements previously constructed that are considered to be an obligation of this Site Development Permit. D. Secure the costs for future improvements that are to be made by others. E. To agree to any combination of these actions, as the City may require. Off-Site Improvements should be completed on a first priority basis. The applicant shall complete Off-Site Improvements in the first phase of construction or by the issuance of the 20% Building Permit. In the event that any of the improvements required for this development are constructed by the City, the applicant shall, prior to the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse the City for the costs of such improvements. 35. The applicant shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on-site and off-site improvements, including an estimate for the final survey monumentation, for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule as approved by the City Engineer. Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant’s detailed cost estimates. 36. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 37. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements). 38. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 12 of 20 the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 39. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a civil engineer registered in the State of California, B. A preliminary geotechnical (“soils”) report prepared by a professional registered in the State of California, C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with LQMC Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with LQMC Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls). E. A WQMP prepared by an authorized professional registered in the State of California. All grading shall conform with the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by soils engineer, or engineering geologist registered in the State of California. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit. Additionally, the applicant shall replenish said security if expended by the City of La Quinta to comply with the Plan as required by the City Engineer. 40. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 41. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition. The maximum RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 13 of 20 slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six feet (6’) of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 42. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer’s approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 43. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot higher from the building pads in adjacent developments. 44. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the lots within this development. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring-owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 45. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus half of a foot (0.5’) from the elevations shown on the approved tentative tract map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Engineer for a substantial conformance review. 46. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor with applicable compaction tests and over excavation documentation. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 14 of 20 DRAINAGE 47. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for Tentative Tract Map 36762. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner. 48. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), Retention Basin Design Criteria, Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 – Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. More specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The design storm shall be either the 1 hour, 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 49. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be disposed of per approved methods contained in Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 – Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. 50. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise and as approved by the City Engineer. 51. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on-site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. 52. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Planning Manager and the City Engineer. 53. For on-site above ground common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 – Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems. Side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. An exception to the Engineering Bulletin shall be granted to allow the basin bottom width to narrow to 13 feet at the east side maintenance RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 15 of 20 entrance. 54. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to LQMC Section 9.100.040(B)(7). 55. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries and levels in any area outside the development. 56. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. 57. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 58. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions for post construction runoff per the City’s NPDES stormwater discharge permit, LQMC Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011. A. For post-construction urban runoff from New Development and Redevelopments Projects, the applicant shall implement requirements of the NPDES permit for the design, construction and perpetual operation and maintenance of BMPs per the approved Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the project as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011. B. The applicant shall implement the WQMP Design Standards per (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011 utilizing BMPs approved by the City Engineer. A project specific WQMP shall be provided which incorporates Site Design and Treatment BMPs utilizing first flush infiltration as a preferred method of NPDES Permit Compliance for Whitewater River receiving water, as applicable. RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 16 of 20 C. The developer shall execute and record a Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Agreement that provides for the perpetual maintenance and operation of stormwater BMPs. UTILITIES 59. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110 (Utilities). 60. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above-ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 61. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 62. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. CONSTRUCTION 63. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly- maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on-site streets in residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 17 of 20 64. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans) 65. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 66. All new landscape areas shall have landscaping and permanent irrigation improvements in compliance with the City’s Water Efficient Landscape regulations contained in LQMC Section 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscape). 67. Except as otherwise stated in these conditions, all landscaping shall consist of, at minimum, 36” box trees (i.e., a minimum 2.5 inch caliper measured three feet up from grade level after planting), 5-gallon shrubs, and groundcover. Double lodge poles (two-inch diameter) shall be used to brace and stake trees. 68. The applicant shall submit the final landscape plans for review, processing and approval to the Design and Development Department, in accordance with the Final Landscape Plan application process as a minor final landscape plan. Planning Manager approval of the final landscape plans is required prior to issuance of the first building permit unless the Planning Manager determines extenuating circumstances exist which justify an alternative processing schedule. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the appropriate City official, including the Planning Manager and/or City Engineer. 69. The applicant or his agent has the responsibility for proper sight distance requirements per guidelines in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) “A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets” latest edition, in the design and/or installation of all landscaping and appurtenances abutting and within the private and public street right-of-way. PUBLIC SERVICES 70. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and as approved by the City Engineer. MAINTENANCE RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 18 of 20 71. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance). 72. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of common areas, perimeter landscaping up to the curb, access drives, sidewalks, and stormwater BMPs. FEES AND DEPOSITS 73. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits). These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. FIRE DEPARTMENT 74. Fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance with the 2016 California Fire Code. A separate plan shall be submitted to fire department for review. Fire hydrants are to be installed and in proper operation before any combustible material is on site. 75. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. Two sets of water plans are to be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. 76. All new proposed residential structures shall be equipped with a fire sprinkler. All fire systems are to be designed by a CSLB C-16 contractor. 77. The minimum dimension for gates is 20 feet clear and unobstructed width and a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches in height. Any gate providing access from a road shall be located at least 35 feet setback from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Where a one-way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 38-foot turning radius shall be used. 78. Fire Apparatus access road and driveways shall be in compliance with the Riverside County Fire Department Standard number 06-05 (located at www.rvcfire.org). RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 19 of 20 79. Any primary/secondary access gates shall be equipped with proper KNOX appliances. Applications to obtain this equipment is available at La Quinta City Hall. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 80. A Native American Monitor shall be present on site during all site disturbing activities. The monitor shall be empowered to stop and/or redirect activities should cultural resources be encountered. 81. A walking path with dog watering and clean up stations shall be added on the outer (east, west, and south sides) edge of the retention basin. 82. Benches and picnic tables shall be added in the turf area located on the east side of the pool. 83. The Olive and Rhus lancia trees shall be 36’ boxes, all other trees shall be 24’ boxes. 84. All plantings shall be per specifications in the landscaping plan submitted October 15,2014 85. Only the Rhus lancia tree shall be standard type trunk, all other trees shall be multi-trunk. 86. All homes shall be designed with a minimum 12 inch eave/overhang of the roof. 87. Homes abutting the northern and western boundary of the site, and homes sited on lots 1 and 46 (adjacent to the project entry) shall be single story models. 88. Homes abutting the northern and western boundary of the property shall be provided architectural enhancements on their northern elevation facing the Citrus. 89. The retaining walls located in the back yards of lots 8 through 27 shall be constructed of split faced block, a similar decorative block, or stucco finished masonry block. Unfinished masonry block shall not be allowed. 90. The applicant shall submit revised precise grading plans as may be required to the City’s Building Division/Public Works Department that reflect the RESOLUTION NO. 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0002 BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP. – FLORESTA ADOPTED: Page 20 of 20 retaining wall specifics. Precise grading shall not be issued a permit without inclusion of the retaining walls. Project Information CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: ARCHITECT: 6,7('(9(/230(173(50,7 %($=(5+20(6+2/',1*6&253 %($=(5+20(6+2/',1*6&253 %(66(1,$1/$*21, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: '$9,'1($8/7$662&,$7(6,1& ENGINEER: 06$&2168/7,1* REQUEST: &216,'(5$5&+,7(&785($1'/$1'6&$3,1*)25 $181,76,1*/()$0,/<+20(75$&7 LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND AVENUE 52 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATION:LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN: WATERMARK SPECIFIC PLAN (SP 2003-069) $6 $0(1'(' SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USES: NORTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/GOLF COURSE EXISTING CITRUS HOMES AND GOLF COURSE SOUTH: GOLF COURSE VACANT (SILVERROCK) EAST: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL EXISTING COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/GOLF COURSE EXISTING CITRUS HOMES AND GOLF COURSE $77$&+0(17 12345678 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 LOT "I"LOT "O"CITRUSCITRUS RETENTION BASIN LOT "P" AVENUE 52 LOT "M"VIA PRESIDIOLOT "Q" VIA S A N M A T E OVIA CRESPIVIA JIMENOVIA TAPIS FRESA CORTE SARRIAVIA TOLOSAVIA SANTEROLOT "L"JEFFERSON STREETLOT "Q"LOT "K"LOT "J"46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 302928 27 262524232221 82 81 80 79 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIATRACT MAP NO. 36762 FLORESTA SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 2 AND LETTERED LOT C, OF TRACT NO. 31798, IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 398, PAGES 53 - 57,INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICES OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PREPARED FOR:BEAZER HOMES HOLDING CORPORATION 1800 EAST IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CALIFORNIA 92821(714)672-7047 INDEX SHEET MAP DATA TABLE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:776-350-001 - 040 & 776-360-001 - 053 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 2 AND LETTERED LOT C, OF TRACT NO. 31798, IN THE CITY OF LAQUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 398, PAGES 53 - 57, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICES OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXISTING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE: PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE: MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) MEDIUM / HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MHDR) EXISTING LAND USE:VACANT LAND / ABANDONED DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED LAND USE:SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN:WATERMARK SPECIFIC PLANAMENDMENT NO. 1 - RESOLUTION 2015-020 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:TYPE "V" CONSTRUCTION OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:OCCUPANCY R-3 GREATEST HEIGHT OF PLAN 1ANY BUILDING:PLAN 1X PLAN 2 PLAN 3 17'-10" 21'-4" 17'-5" 19'-4" EXISTING GROSS & NET ACREAGE: LAND USE DESCRIPTION: EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LOTS 1 - 82 EXISTING OPEN SPACE LOTS 20.84 AC. ACREAGE 907,885 SF SF 100% PERCENTAGE 13.59 AC.591,874 SF 3.80 AC.165,437 SF 18% 65% GREATEST NUMBER OF STORIES PLAN 1AND AREA:PLAN 1X PLAN 2 PLAN 3 SINGLE STORY SINGLE STORY SINGLE STORY SINGLE STORY 2,338 SF 3,009 SF 2,474 SF 2,508 SF PARKING REQUIRED:164 STALLS (IN GARAGE) ONSITE PARKING DATA: COUNT PARKING PROVIDED: PARKING RATIO PER CODE 2 STALLS PER UNIT IN A GARAGE - PLUS 0.5 GUEST STALL PER UNIT IFNO ON-STREET PARKING IS PROVIDED 41 STALLS (GUEST)205 STALLS (TOTAL) 164 STALLS (IN GARAGE)164 STALLS (GUEST @ DRIVEWAYS)10 STALLS (GUEST @ LOT "L")338 STALLS (TOTAL) EXISTING PRIVATE STREETS 3.46 AC.150,575 SF 17% SHEET I-1FLORESTATRACT 36762 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - INDEX SHEET APPLICANT / ADDRESS: CONTACT: 1800 EAST IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CALIFORNIA 92821 (714)672-7047 CIVIL ENGINEER: ADDRESS: MSA CONSULTING, INC. 34200 BOB HOPE DRIVERANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270 CONTACT:JULIAN A. DE LA TORRE (PE C43880)TELEPHONE:(760) 320-9811 BEAZER HOMES HOLDING CORPORATIONLAND OWNER: ARCHITECT: ADDRESS: BASSENIAN LAGONI 2031 ORCHARD DRIVENEWPORT, CALIFORNIA 92660 CONTACT:(949) 553-9100 LANDSCAPE ADDRESS: DAVID NEAULT ASSOCIATES, INC. 41877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH, SUITE 140TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 CONTACT:(951) 296-3430 ARCHITECT: EXHIBIT PREPARES: EXHIBIT DATE: JUNE 13, 2018 SHEET INDEX: I-1 INDEX SHEET C-1 SITE PLANC-2A AREAS OF CHANGE - SUBSTANTIAL L-1 ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLANL-2 WALL AND FENCE PLAN MAINTENANCE EXHIBITL-3 WALL AND FENCE DETAILS ENTRY ENLARGEMENTL-4 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANL-5 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANL-6 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANL-7 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANL-8 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANL-9 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANL-10 CONCEPTUAL FRONT YARDS A-1 STREET SCENEFRONT ELEVATIONA1-2 A1-3 FLOOR PLAN OPTIONS A1-4 ELEVATION LA QUINTA A1-5 FLOOR PLAN SPANISH REVIVAL A1-6 ELEVATION SPANISH REVIVAL A1-7 FLOOR PLAN HACIENDA A1-8 ELEVATION HACIENDA SHEET INDEX CONTINUED: A2-1 FRONT ELEVATIONA2-2 FLOOR PLAN LA QUINTAA2-3 ELEVATION LA QUINTAA2-4 FLOOR PLAN SPANISH REVIVALA2-5 ELEVATION SPANISH REVIVALA2-6 FLOOR PLAN HACIENDAA2-7 ELEVATION HACIENDAA3-1 FRONT ELEVATIONA3-2 FLOOR PLAN LA QUINTA A3-4 ELEVATION LA QUINTA A3-5 FLOOR PLAN SPANISH REVIVAL A3-6 FLOOR PLAN HACIENDA ELEVATION HACIENDA R-1 STREET PERSPECTIVE / RENDERINGR-2 STREET PERSPECTIVE / RENDERINGR-3 STREET PERSPECTIVE / RENDERING P-1 POOL BUILDING FLOOR PLANP-2 POOL BUILDING ELEVATION 1 OF 4 ROUGH GRADING PLAN2 OF 43 OF 44 OF 4 ROUGH GRADING PLANROUGH GRADING PLANROUGH GRADING PLAN L-11 CONCEPTUAL FRONT YARDS A1-1 A1-2 FLOOR PLAN OPTIONS (AREAS OF CHANGE) FLOOR PLANSFLOOR PLANS (AREAS OF CHANGE) A1-3 A1-4 ELEVATION LA QUINTA (AREAS OF CHANGE) A1-5 FLOOR PLAN SPANISH REVIVAL (AREAS OF CHANGE) A1-6 ELEVATION SPANISH REVIVAL (AREAS OF CHANGE) A1-7 FLOOR PLAN HACIENDA (AREAS OF CHANGE) A1-8 ELEVATION HACIENDA (AREAS OF CHANGE) A3-2 FLOOR PLAN LA QUINTA (AREAS OF CHANGE)A3-3 A3-4 FLOOR PLAN SPANISH REVIVAL (AREAS OF CHANGE) A3-7 ELEVATION SPANISH REVIVAL A3-6 FLOOR PLAN HACIENDA (AREAS OF CHANGE) C-1 COLOR SELECTION CHARTC-2 COLOR SELECTION CHART C-2B AREAS OF CHANGE - SECONDARYRESIDENCE EGRESS & LLA 2018 CONFORMANCE 2015 RETAINING WALL PLAN - LOTS 9-271 OF 1 FRONT ELEVATION 1XA1-10 A1-11 FLOOR PLAN1X OPTIONS A1-12 ELEVATION LA QUINTA 1X A1-13 FLOOR PLAN SPANISH REVIVAL 1X A1-14 ELEVATION SPANISH REVIVAL 1X A1-15 FLOOR PLAN HACIENDA 1X A1-16 ELEVATION HACIENDA 1X A1-9 A1-10 FLOOR PLAN OPTIONS 1X (AREAS OF CHANGE) FLOOR PLANS 1XFLOOR PLANS 1X (AREAS OF CHANGE) A1-11 A1-12 ELEVATION LA QUINTA 1X (AREAS OF CHANGE) A1-13 FLOOR PLAN SPANISH REVIVAL 1X (AREAS OF CHANGE) A1-14 ELEVATION SPANISH REVIVAL 1X (AREAS OF CHANGE) A1-15 FLOOR PLAN HACIENDA 1X (AREAS OF CHANGE) A1-16 ELEVATION HACIENDA 1X (AREAS OF CHANGE) $77$&+0(17 /27,/272CITRUSCITRUS 5(7(17,21%$6,1 /273 AVENUE 52 /270VIA PRESIDIO/274 VIA S A N M A T E OVIA CRESPIVIA JIMENOVIA TAPIS FRESA CORTE SARRIAVIA TOLOSAVIA SANTERO/27/JEFFERSON STREET/274/27./27-322/ 63$ &20081,7<%/'*                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   3$5.,1* 3$5.,1*                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 1ƒ : 1ƒ ( 1ƒ ( 1ƒ ( 1ƒ ( 1ƒ : 1ƒ ( 1ƒ :      1ƒ ( 1ƒ ( 1ƒ ( /  5  7  ' ƒ  /  1ƒ :/  1ƒ : /  5  7  ' ƒ  /  5  7  ' ƒ  /  5  7  ' ƒ 1ƒ ( /  5  7  ' ƒ  (175<*$7(%/'* (;   (;5: 352-(&7%281'$5< (;&85% *877(5 (;&/ (;&85% *877(5 (;5:(;5: 352-(&7%281'$5<(;&85% *877(5(;&/(;&85% *877(5(;5:      35,9$7(675((7 35,9$7(675((7 35,9$7(675((7 5  5   5   5  5   5  5  7<3 5  7<3 5  5  5   5   A A AA B B CC  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* (  1* (  1*  1* 7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7: ( 1* 1 1* 6 7) 7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   (;:$// (;:$// (;:$// (;:$// 16) 26)36) 46) 56)66) 76)86) 9 10 116) 126) 136) 146) 156) 166) 176) 186) 196)206) 216)226) 236)246)256) 266) 276) 286) 296)306) 356) 366) 376) 386) 396)406)416) 426) 436) 446) 456) 466) 476) 486) 496) 506) 516) 526) 536) 546) 556) 566) 576) 586) 596) 606) 616) 626) 636) 646) 656) 686) 676) 666) 736) 726) 716) 706) 696) 786) 776) 766) 756) 746) 82 6) 816) 806) 796) 3( 3(3(3( 3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3( 3( 3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3(3(3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3( 3( 3( 3(3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3(3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1&5 3/$1$5 3/$1%5 3/$1&/ 3/$1&/ 3/$1$5 3/$1%/3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1%/ 3/$1&5 3/$1$/ 3/$1%5 3/$1&/3/$1$53/$1$/3/$1$5 3/$1%/ 3/$1&5 3/$1&5 3/$1$/ 3/$1%53/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/ 3/$1$53/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/ 3/$1$53/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1$/3/$1$53/$1$5 3/$1$/3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 6) 6) 6) 6) 75:)* )* 75:  75:)* )*75:  1* ( 75:)* )*75:  1* ( 75:)* )*75:                    1* ( 75:)* )*75:   1* ( 75:)* )*75: 75:)* )*75: 75:)* 75:)* 75:)* 75:)* 75:)* 75:)* 75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)* 75:)*75:)*75:)* 75:)* 75:)* 75:)* EX. WALL       31 32 33 34      5($5<$5'6(7%$&. 6,'(<$5'6(7%$&. )5217<$5'6(7%$&.72*$5$*( )5217<$5'6(7%$&. 3/ 5: TRACT 36762 - WATERMARK SITE PLAN SHEET C-1WATERMARKTRACT 36762SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - SITE PLAN APPLICANT / ADDRESS: CONTACT: ($67,03(5,$/+,*+:$<68,7(%5($&$/,)251,$   %($=(5+20(6+2/',1*&25325$7,21LAND OWNER: EXHIBIT PREPARER: PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECT SUPERVISION OF SIGNATURE JULIAN A. DE LA TORRE DATE C43880 R.C.E. NO. EXHIBIT DATE: MAY 15, 2018 176 SECTION A-A PRIVATE ON-SITE ROAD 176 EMERGENCY ACCESS ROAD SECTION B-B 176 ACCESS ROAD SECTION C-C (NO PARKING BOTH SIDES)(NO PARKING BOTH SIDES) 176 BUILDING SETBACKSTYPICAL 1/27,/272CITRUSCITRUS 5(7(17,21%$6,1 /273 AVENUE 52 /270VIA PRESIDIO/274 VIA S A N M A T E OVIA CRESPIVIA JIMENOVIA TAPIS FRESA CORTE SARRIAVIA TOLOSAVIA SANTERO/27/JEFFERSON STREET/274/27./27-6) 26)36) 46) 56)66) 76)86) 9 10 116) 126) 136) 146) 156) 166) 176) 186) 196)206) 216)226) 236)246)256) 266) 276) 286) 296)306) 317,882 SF 327,053 SF 337,040 SF 346,948 SF 356) 366) 376) 386) 396)406)416) 426) 436) 446) 456) 466) 476) 486) 496) 506) 516) 526) 536) 546) 556) 566) 576) 586) 596) 606) 616) 626) 636) 646) 656) 686) 676) 666) 736) 726) 716) 706) 696) 786) 776) 766) 756) 746) 82 6) 816) 806) 796) 322/ 63$ &20081,7<%/'* 3$5.,1* 3$5.,1*                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            1ƒ : 1ƒ ( 1ƒ ( 1ƒ ( 1ƒ ( 1ƒ : 1ƒ ( 1ƒ :     1ƒ ( 1ƒ ( 1ƒ ( 3( 3(3(3( 3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3( 3( 3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3(3(3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3( 3( 3( 3(3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3(3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3(3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( 3( /  5  7  ' ƒ  /  1ƒ :/  1ƒ : /  5  7  ' ƒ /  5  7  ' ƒ  /  5  7  ' ƒ 1ƒ ( /  5  7  ' ƒ  (175<*$7(%/'* (;   (;5: 352-(&7%281'$5< (;&85% *877(5 (;&/ (;&85% *877(5 (;5:(;5: 352-(&7%281'$5<(;&85% *877(5(;&/(;&85% *877(5(;5:   35,9$7(675((7 35,9$7(675((7 35,9$7(675((7 5  5   5   5  5   5  5  7<3 5  7<3 5   5  5   5   3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1&5 3/$1$5 3/$1%5 3/$1&/ 3/$1&/ 3/$1$5 3/$1%/3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1%/ 3/$1&5 3/$1$/ 3/$1%5 3/$1&/3/$1$53/$1$/3/$1$5 3/$1%/ 3/$1&5 3/$1&5 3/$1$/ 3/$1%53/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/ 3/$1$53/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/ 3/$1$/ 3/$1$53/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1$5 3/$1$/3/$1$53/$1$5 3/$1$/3/$1$5 3/$1$/ 3/$1$5 SECONDARY RESIDENCEACCESS - EGRESS ONLY EX. LOT LINE ADJUSTED LOT LINE EX. LOT LINE ADJUSTED LOT LINE ADJUSTED LOT LINE EX. LOT LINE ADJUSTED LOT LINE EX. LOT LINE 1'1'1.43'6) 6) 6) 6) TRACT 36762 - WATERMARK AREAS OF CHANGE PER SECONDARY RESIDENCE EGRESS AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (2018)SHEET C-2AWATERMARKTRACT 36762 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - AREAS OF CHANGE (2018) APPLICANT / ADDRESS: CONTACT: ($67,03(5,$/+,*+:$<68,7(%5($&$/,)251,$   %($=(5+20(6+2/',1*&25325$7,21LAND OWNER: EXHIBIT PREPARER: PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECT SUPERVISION OF SIGNATURE JULIAN A. DE LA TORRE DATE C43880 R.C.E. NO. EXHIBIT DATE: MAY 15, 2018 LEGEND: $GMXVWHG/RW/LQH ([LVWLQJ/RW/LQH $GMXVW/RW$UHD6,948 SF 6)([LVWLQJ/RW$UHD 5??$&$'?3ODQQLQJ?6'3?$UHDVRI&KDQJHGZJ30GGHZHJHOL06$&RQVXOWLQJ,QF 52ND AVENUE JEFFERSON STREET20 21 22 23 24 25 191817 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 52 51 50 49 48 4758 57 56 55 54 53 26 27 28 29 30 63 64 65 6869 78 79 80 81 82 74 75 76 77 70 71 72 73 67 66 62 61 60 59 6) 3(3( 6)3(3( 6) 3( 3( 6)3(3( 6)3(3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3(6)3(3(6) 3( 3(6)3(3(6)3(3( 6)3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6)3(3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6)3( 3( 6)3(3( 6)3(3( 6) 3( 3( 6)3(3(6)3(3( 6)3(3( 6)3(3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6)3(3( 6) 3(3( 6)3( 3( 6)3( 3( 6)3(3( 6)3( 3( 6) 3(3( 6)3( 3( 6) 3(3( 6)3( 3( 6) 3(3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6)3(3(6) 3(3(6)3(3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6)3( 3( 6)3(3( 6)3(3( 6)3(3( 6) 3( 3( 6)3( 3( 6)3( 3( 6)3(3( 6)3( 3( 3( 3( 6)3(3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3(3( 6)3(3( 6)3(3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6)3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6) 3( 3( 6)3(3( 6) 3(3( 6) 6) 3(3( 6) 6) 3( 3( 6) 6) 3(3( 6)6) 3(3( 6)6) 3(3( 6)6) 3(3( 6)6) 3(3( 6)6) 3( 3( 6) 6) 3(3( 6)                                    PROP. C.V.W.D. SEWER EASEMENT                                       VIA SAN METEO VIA TAPIS VIA SANTEROVIA TOLOSAVIA JIMENOVIA CRESPIVIA PERSIDIOCITRUS CITRUSVIA SARRIAFRESA RECREATION CENTER PROP. C.V.W.D. SEWER EASEMENT  PROP. 8'BENCH PROP. 8'BENCH 7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6    1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* 6  1* (  1* (  1* (  1* (  1* (  1*  1*  1* 6  1* 6 7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7: (  1* 1 1* 6 7)7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7& 7&7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&7&)* )* 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7& 7&7&7&7&  7& 7& 7&737373737373737373737373737: )* : )* ( 7) 7: )* 1 )* 6 7) 7:)* 1 )* 6 7) 7:)* 1 )* 6 7) 7:)* 1 )* 6 7) 7:)* 1 )* 6 7) 7: )* 1 )* 6 7) 7: )* 1 )* 6 7) 7:)* 1 )* 6 7) 7:  1* (   7:  1* 1  7:  1* 1   7: 1* ( 1* :   7)7:  1* :   7:  1* :   7:  1* :                 3 8 ( 3 8 (38(38(     38(38(   38(38(      38(38(      38(38(      38(38( 75:)* 75:)* 75:)* 75:)* 75: )* 75: )* 75:)* 75:)* 75: )* 75: )* 75:)* 75: )* 7:  1* 6    1* ( 7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   75:)* 75: )* 7:  1* 6   75:)*75:)*7 5:      )*      7 5:      )*     75: )* 75: )* 75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*75:)*7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   PROP.CATCHBASINS PROP.CATCHBASIN PROP.CATCHBASINS PROP.CATCHBASINS PROP. 24" STORMDRAIN OUTLET PROP. 30" STORMDRAIN OUTLET      PROP. 18"STORMDRAIN PROP. 18"STORMDRAIN PROP. 18"STORMDRAIN PROP. 18"STORMDRAIN PROP. 30"STORMDRAIN PROP. 24"STORMDRAIN PROP. 18"STORMDRAIN PROP. 30"STORMDRAIN PROP. 18"STORMDRAIN PROP. 24"STORMDRAIN EX. WALL EX. WALL EX. WALL EX. WALLEX. WALLEX. WALL EX. WALL EX. WALL EX. WALL EX. WALL EX. WALL PROP.C.V.W.D.GATE PROP. C.V.W.D.GATE WITHMAN GATE  38( 38( 38( 38( 38( 38( 38(   EX. EMERGENCY ACCESSAND C.V.W.D. GATE  38( 38(L d: Ad d L L d R - -W 6) Pr d C.V.W.D. S r E Ad d R B C r E R B C r Pr d S r Dr L Pr d S r Dr C B Pr d S r Dr O Ad d L Ar 3(Ad d P d E (PE) 3(T Tr M P d E (PE) 73Ad d T P (TP) Pr d T C r (TC) 1 Pr d F d Gr d (FG) Pr d T F (TF) Pr d T R W (TRW) E T W (TW) E N r Gr d (NG) N r 6 S 1*  7:  75: 7) )* 7& ( E : W Pr d P U E (PUE) Pr d R W E W SHEET C-2BWATERMARKTRACT 36762 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - AREAS OF CHANGE (2015) APPLICANT / ADDRESS: CONTACT: ($67,03(5,$/+,*+:$<68,7(%5($&$/,)251,$   %($=(5+20(6+2/',1*&25325$7,21LAND OWNER: EXHIBIT PREPARER: PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECT SUPERVISION OF SIGNATURE JULIAN A. DE LA TORRE DATE C43880 R.C.E. NO. EXHIBIT DATE: MAY 15, 2018 TRACT 36762 - WATERMARK AREAS OF CHANGE PER APPROVED SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE (2015)5??$&$'?3ODQQLQJ?6'3?$UHDVRI&KDQJHSHU6XEVWDQWLDO&RQIRUPDQFHGZJ30GGHZHJHOL06$&RQVXOWLQJ,QF Tract No. 36762 - Watermark (Beazer Homes) Alternate Retaining Wall Plan - Lots 9-27 MSA CONSULTING, INC.www.msaconsultinginc.com Exhibit Date: July 6, 2018 P/L NATURAL GRADE (NG) PROP. SECTION A-A Lots 9-27 Typical Rear Yard with Proposed Retaining Wall PROP.HOUSE TOP OF RETAINING 2:1SLOPE WALL (TRW) EXISTING BLOCK WALL(SEE PLAN FOR TOP Typical Rear Yard with Slope and Optional Retaining Wall - Plan View Scale: 1" = 40' n.t.s. 3' (MIN.) 2' 13' (MIN.) - 25' (MAX.) 18' (AVG.) 15.4' (AVG.) 6.9' (MIN.) - 21.9' (MAX.) OF WALL (TW) HEIGHTS) SWALE PROP.FINISHEDFLOOR (FF) PROP.PAD ELEVATION (PE) NG(SEE PLAN)(SEE PLAN)6"MIN.FINISHED GRADE (FG)(SEE PLAN)3.6' (AVG.)1.9' (MIN.) -5.2' (MAX.)±4.6'(MIN.)-±5.9'(MAX.)5.4' (AVG.) (SEE PLAN)JEFFERSON STREET                          20 21 22 23 24 25191817 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 32 31 5253 26 27 28 29 30 63 6465 686978 79 80 81 82 77 70 67 PLAN 1A PE 28.4 PLAN 2A PE 28.7PLAN 3A PE 28.7PLAN 1A PE 28.5PLAN 3APE 28.1 PLAN 2A PE 27.8PLAN 1A PE 27.4PLAN 3A PE 27.1 PLAN 2A PE 28.8 PLAN 3A PE 29.2 PLAN 1A PE 29.6 PLAN 3A PE 30.0 PLAN 2A PE 30.4 PLAN 1A PE 30.6 PLAN 1C PE 30.9 3/$1$ 3( 3/$1% 3( 3/$1$ 3( 3/$1$ 3(3/$1$3( 3/$1$ 3( 3/$1$ 3( 3/$1$ 3( 3/$1$ 3( 3/$1$ 3( 3/$1$ 3( 3/$1$3( 3/$1$3( 3/$1$3( 3/$1$ 3( 3/$1$3( PLAN 1A PE 26.8 PLAN 3A PE 26.6 PLAN 2A PE 26.3 PLAN 1A PE 26.0 PLAN 3A PE 25.7 PLAN 2APE 25.6 PLAN 2A PE 25.6 PLAN 1APE 25.6 PLAN 3A PE 25.6 3/$1$ 3(3/$1$ 3(AAEX. PROJECT BOUNDARYAND BLOCK WALL VIA TAPIS VIAJIMENOVIACRESPICITRUS CITRUSCORTESARRIAFRESA    PROP. RETAINING WALL ROUGH GRADING TOE OF SLOPE EX. PROJECT BOUNDARYAND BLOCK WALL PROP. RETAINING WALL ROUGH GRADING TOE OF SLOPE EX. PROJECT BOUNDARYAND BLOCK WALLPROP. RETAINING WALLROUGH GRADING TOE OF SLOPE                               7:  1* 6  7: (  1* 1 1* 6 7)7:  1* 6  7:  1* 6  7 :     1* 6     7:  1 * 6  7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   7:  1* 6   1*  75:)*1*  75:)*1*  75: )* 1*  75: )* 75: )* 1*  75: )* 75: )* 1*  75: )* 75: )* 1*  75: )* 75: )* 7:  75: )* 75: )* 1*  75: )* 75: )* 1*  75: )* 75: )* 1*  75: )* 75: )* 7:  1* 6  7:  1* 6  1* 6  7:  1* 6  7:  1* 6  7:  1* 6  1*  1*  75:)* 1*  75:)* 75:)* 1*  75:)* 75:)* 1*  75: )* 75:)* 1*  75: )* 75:)* 1*  75:  )* 75: )* 1 *   7 5 :  )* 7 5 :  )* 1*  75:)*75:)*7:  1* 6  7:  1* 6  7:  1* 6  7:  1* 6  7:  1* 6  7:  1* 6  7:  1* 6  1*  1*  1*  1 32 5 P PL PLA P 1 1 2A 0 2 2A 6 LA 0   0 /3 70  6 3(  5??$&$'?3ODQQLQJ?6XEVWDQWLDO &RQIRUPDQFH? $OWHUQDWH 5HDU \DUG 5HWDLQLQJ :DOO 2SWLRQGZJ   $0 IVWDQZD\ 06$ &RQVXOWLQJ ,QF ´ ´´ ³´5??$&$'?*UDGLQJ?5RXJK? 7UDFW  5RXJK *UDGLQJ GZJ   30 IVWDQZD\ 06$ &RQVXOWLQJ ,QF 5??$&$'?*UDGLQJ?5RXJK? 7UDFW  5RXJK *UDGLQJ GZJ   30 IVWDQZD\ 06$ &RQVXOWLQJ ,QF 5??$&$'?*UDGLQJ?5RXJK? 7UDFW  5RXJK *UDGLQJ GZJ   30 IVWDQZD\ 06$ &RQVXOWLQJ ,QF 5??$&$'?*UDGLQJ?5RXJK? 7UDFW  5RXJK *UDGLQJ GZJ   30 IVWDQZD\ 06$ &RQVXOWLQJ ,QF L LL L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L N O R T H 0 40' Scale: 1"=40' 80'20' 120' 52nd AVENUEPROJECT ENTRY W/ GUARD HOUSE, WATER FEATURE & ENTRY GATES OPEN TURF / PLAY AREA BASIN JEFFERSON STREETL-1 drawn: checked: scale: date: DSN 7.6.18PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANESP / BLLA QUINTABEAZER HOMES1800 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CA 92821 (714) 672-7003David ASSOCIATES Inc.EAULT www.dnassociates.com 951 296 3430 sheet SIGNATURE RENEWAL DATE DATE 06-30-2018 S TATEOF CA L I F O RNIALICENSEDLA ND SCAPE AR C H I T ECTDavidS.N eault N o. 2 88441877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 140 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLANPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE VEHICLE EGRESS PARKING STALLS PARKING STALLS 5' CONCRETE WALK 12' CONCRETE WALK RIGHT OF WAY 40' 35'47' 37' 68' RIGHT OF WAY POOL POOL BUILDING / RESTROOMS BBQ / LOUNGE SHADE CABANA LOT LINE LOT LINE 55' C.L. R.O.W. 60'R.O.W.C.L. 5' CONCRETE WALK 18' 9'CITRUS LANEFRESA LANE PROPOSED GOLF CART PATH TO CITRUS COUNTRY CLUB NOTE: REAR YARDS TO BE LANDSCAPED BY PRIVATE HOMEOWNER BENCH BENCH (1 OF 8) D.G. PATH DOG WASTE STATION DOG WASTE STATION BOLLARD PATH LIGHTS (TYP) BOLLARD PATH LIGHTS (TYP) PICNIC TABLES PICNIC TABLESBOLLARD PATH LIGHTS (TYP) 21 32 132R41536 17 28 39 110 211 312 113 121 130 140 148 150 154 158 160 165 167 173 175 178 182 116 118 124 131 133 143 219 223 225 234 236 238 344 246 252 356 268 276 279 214 127 229 232 341 247 261 263270 272 280 255 257 320 322 326 335 337 339 245 359 364 366 369 374 377 381 315 317 328 342 362 371 349 351 353 PERIMETER WALL: HEIGHT, COLOR, AND FINISH TO MATCH EXISTING 6' HIGH SLUMP BLOCK WALL 5'-6" PRECISION BLOCK WALL EXISTING PERIMETER WALL TO REMAIN WALL AND FENCE LEGEND 6' HIGH TUBE STEEL VIEW FENCE 3-RAIL FENCE MAINTENANCE LEGEND H.O.A. MAINTAINED 157,880 S.F. / 3.6 ACRES 52nd AVENUE JEFFERSON STREETL-2 drawn: checked: scale: date: DSN 7.6.18PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANESP / BLLA QUINTABEAZER HOMES1800 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CA 92821 (714) 672-7003David ASSOCIATES Inc.EAULT www.dnassociates.com 951 296 3430 sheet SIGNATURE RENEWAL DATE DATE 06-30-2018 S TATEOF CA L I F O RNIALICENSEDLA ND SCAPE AR C H I T ECTDavidS.N eault N o. 2 88441877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 140 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 WALL AND FENCE PLANMAINTENANCE EXHIBITRECREATION AREA PASEO BASIN N O R T HScale: 1"=20' 0 20' 40' 80' RETAINING WALL PER CIVIL PLANS RETAINING WALL PER CIVIL PLANS L-3 drawn: checked: scale: date: DSN 7.6.18PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANESP / BLLA QUINTABEAZER HOMES1800 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CA 92821 (714) 672-7003David ASSOCIATES Inc.EAULT www.dnassociates.com 951 296 3430 sheet SIGNATURE RENEWAL DATE DATE 06-30-2018 S TATEOF CA L I F O RNIALICENSEDLA ND SCAPE AR C H I T ECTDavidS.N eault N o. 2 88441877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 140 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 WALL AND FENCE DETAILSELEVATIONS6' TUBULAR STEEL FENCE PRECISION BLOCK WALL PERIMETER WALL / DECORATIVE BLOCK MAJOR CORNER TREATMENT SCALE 1'=20' 6' PERIMETER WALL SCREEN HEDGE WITH COLORFUL GROUNDCOVER DATE PALM CLUSTER NOTE: PLANT SIZES SHOWN AT APPROXIMATELY 2/3 MATURITY PATH LIGHT BOLLARD POOL CABANAS POOL ENTRY GATE SCALE 1/4"=1'-0" SCALE 1/4"=1'-0" SLUMP BLOCK WALL 3-RAIL FENCE L-4 drawn: checked: scale: date: DSN 7.6.18PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANESP / BLLA QUINTABEAZER HOMES1800 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CA 92821 (714) 672-7003David ASSOCIATES Inc.EAULT www.dnassociates.com 951 296 3430 sheet SIGNATURE RENEWAL DATE DATE 06-30-2018 S TATEOF CA L I F O RNIALICENSEDLA ND SCAPE AR C H I T ECTDavidS.N eault N o. 2 88441877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 140 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 ENTRY ENLARGEMENT52nd AVENUE PROJECT ENTRY PROJECT ENTRY ELEVATION UPDATED GUARD HOUSE SCALE 1'=10' SCALE 1'=10' 50' 26' 50' 26' 30' 30' 12'12' ENTRY TRELLIS FOCAL POTS WATER FEATURE PER ORIGINAL PLANS ENHANCED PAVING FOCAL POTS WATER FEATURE PER ORIGINAL PLAN VEHICLE GATES PEDESTRIAN ACCESS UPDATED GUARD HOUSE DATE PALM CLUSTER NOTE: PLANT SIZES SHOWN AT APPROXIMATELY 2/3 MATURITY 312 113 178 116 118 219 276 279 214 280 377 315 317 HHHHHHHHHHHLLLLLLLLLL VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY CALIF. FAN PALM BOUGAINVILLEA "ROSENKA" HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA BOUGAINVILLEA RED YUCCA WASHINGTONIA FILIFERA H 15 GALLON LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 5 GALLON L BOUGAINVILLEA "TORCH GLOW" BOUGAINVILLEA 5 GALLOND 16' B.T.H. CAT'S CLAW VINEMACFADYENA UNGUIS-CATI 5 GALLON 5 GALLON BOTTLE TREEBRACHYCHITON POPULNEUS 24" BOX LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 15 GALLON B L LE HYDRO-SEED MIX - SEE MIX BELOW BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 36" BOX THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITEPROSOPIS CHILENSIS 24" BOX BUXUS MICROPHYLLA KOREANA KOREAN BOXWOOD 15 GALLONBX FEIJOA SELLOWIANA PINEAPPLE GUAVA 15 GALLONFe BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 24" BOX CARISSA "EMERALD CARPET" NATAL PLUM 5 GALLONC Ru LEUCOPHYLLUM LAEVEGATUM CHIHUAHUAN SAGE 5 GALLON AFRICAN SUMAC RHUS LANCEA 24" BOX DATE PALMPHOENIX D. "MEDJOOL" 20' B.T.H. RUELLIA PENINSULARIS DESERT RUELLIA 5 GALLON YUCCA RUPICOLA TWISTED LEAF YUCCA 5 GALLON SLENDER LADY PALMRHAPIS EXCELSA 24" BOX RHAPHIOLEPIS "MAJESTIC BEAUTY" INDIA HAWTHORN 15 GALLONRh Y HYBRID BERMUDA"TIF-GREEN" - OR EQUAL SOD MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD LOW LOW MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD HIGHIF TURF IS PLANTED IN WINTER CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY SOD IS OVER-SEEDED WITH PERENNIAL RYE BLUE PALO VERDE FRUITLESS OLIVE DATE PALM THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITE AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA" BUDDLEIA MARRUBIFOLIA CAESALPINIA PULCHERRIMA CALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN' CALLIANDRA CALIFORNICA FOUQUIERIA SPLENDENS HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA MUHLENBERGIA "REGAL MIST" ROCK COBBLE: 3"-5" MEXICAN BEACH COBBLE TO MATCH COBBLE IN ADJACENT MEDIANS ON JEFFERSON VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT DESERT BUTTERFLY BUSH RED BIRD OF PARADISE DWARF CALLISTEMON BAJA FAIRY DUSTER OCOTILLO RED YUCCA PINK MUHLY CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM OLEA EUROPEA "WILSONII" PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA PROSOPIS CHILENSIS Mu Ca H 5 GALLON BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 5 GALLON 20' B.T.H. CC C F 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 15 GALLON 5 GALLON A 5 GALLON 24" BOX LOW MOD BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'ROSENKA'1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. LOW MOD LOW LOW LOW5 GALLON DAYLILYHEMEROCALLIS "LITTLE BOBO"1 GALLON @ 18" O.C. CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 5 GALLON LOWCB LEUCOPHYLLUM "GREEN CLOUD" TEXAS RANGER LOW5 GALLON MOD LE SPREADING LANTANALANTANA "SPREADING SUNSET"1 GALLON @ 12" O.C. SPREADING LANTANALANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS 1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. MOD LOW MAYTENUS PHYLLANTHOIDES MANGLE DULCE 5 GALLON LOWMy DALEA F. "SIERRA NEGRA" DALEA 5 GALLON LOWD LOWBU 60" BOX LOW 24" BOX LOW BOUGAINVILLEA BRASILIENSIS BOUGAINVILLEA 15 GALLON MODB AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA"VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT 15 GALLON LOWAG 3" DEPTH DECOMPOSED GRANITE: 'PALOMINO CORAL' BY SOUTHWEST BOULDER TO L.A. PRIOR TO ORDERING 30% - 5/8" MINUS / 70% - 5/8" SCREENED CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLE IN ALL PLANTER AREAS CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 15 GALLON LOWCB BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 15 GALLON MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW SPECIES LBS / ACRE ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM COLLINSIA HEEROPHYLLA GAILLARDIA PULCHELLA ESCHSCHOLZIA CALIFORNICA LASTHENIA CALIFORNICA GAZANIA SPLENDENS VERBENA TENUISECTA LOTUS CORNICULATUS TRIFOLIUM FRAGIFERUM 'O CONNORS' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'CARPET SNOW' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'ROYAL CARPET' 0.2 4 4 1.5 0.2 8 4 5 8 3 5 PRODUCT LBS / ACRE -CONWED 100% WOOD FIBER -ECOLOGY CONTROLS M-BINDER -AM-120 MYCORRHIZAL INOCULUM DESERT SUITE -SEED MIX AS SPECIFIED - SUPPLIED BY S&S SEEDS 2000 150 60 SLURRY COMPONENTS CONTACT S & S SEEDS AT 805-684-0436 BOTANICAL NAME VINES SIZECOMMON NAMESYM TREES PLANT LEGEND GROUNDCOVER WATER USE SHRUBS N O R T HScale: 1"=20'L-5 drawn: checked: scale: date: DSN 7.6.18PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANESP / BLLA QUINTABEAZER HOMES1800 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CA 92821 (714) 672-7003David ASSOCIATES Inc.EAULT www.dnassociates.com 951 296 3430 sheet SIGNATURE RENEWAL DATE DATE 06-30-2018 S TATEOF CA L I F O RNIALICENSEDLA ND SCAPE AR C H I T ECTDavidS.N eault N o. 2 88441877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 140 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANTOTAL PROJECT AREA: 926,811 SQ FT TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA: 163,131 SQ FT / 18% OF SITE TOTAL TURF AREA: 7,486 SQ FT / 5% OF LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION NOTES 1. DESIGNS WILL COMPLY WITH CITY OF LA QUINTA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT'S LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN ORDINANCE 2. ALL TURF WITHIN 2' OF HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUB-SURFACE DRIP. ALL TURF 2' OR GREATER FROM HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH ROTOR/SPRAY. ALL LANDSCAPE TO BE IRRIGATED WITH DRIP. 3. ET BASED CONTROLLERS WILL BE USED ON SITE MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-8 0 20' 40' 80'MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-6 121 165 167 124 219 223 225 268 263 270 320 322 326 364 366 369 362 71 HLDHHHHHHHHLLLLLLLLLLLDDDDDDDHHHHHHHHHHH Ru Ru Ru RuRu Ru Ru CBCB CBCB CB CB CB LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE Ru Ru Ca Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru CBCaCaCaCaCa CaCaCaCaCa CaCaCaCa CaCaCaCaCaCaRu RuRu H HH H MuMuMuMuMuMuMuMuMu Mu MuMu Mu HHHH H HH HHHHHHHH Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu LLLL H L D D D D D D LLLLL HHH HH D VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY CALIF. FAN PALM BOUGAINVILLEA "ROSENKA" HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA BOUGAINVILLEA RED YUCCA WASHINGTONIA FILIFERA H 15 GALLON LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 5 GALLON L BOUGAINVILLEA "TORCH GLOW" BOUGAINVILLEA 5 GALLOND 16' B.T.H. CAT'S CLAW VINEMACFADYENA UNGUIS-CATI 5 GALLON 5 GALLON BOTTLE TREEBRACHYCHITON POPULNEUS 24" BOX LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 15 GALLON B L LE HYDRO-SEED MIX - SEE MIX BELOW BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 36" BOX THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITEPROSOPIS CHILENSIS 24" BOX BUXUS MICROPHYLLA KOREANA KOREAN BOXWOOD 15 GALLONBX FEIJOA SELLOWIANA PINEAPPLE GUAVA 15 GALLONFe BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 24" BOX CARISSA "EMERALD CARPET" NATAL PLUM 5 GALLON C Ru LEUCOPHYLLUM LAEVEGATUM CHIHUAHUAN SAGE 5 GALLON AFRICAN SUMAC RHUS LANCEA 24" BOX DATE PALMPHOENIX D. "MEDJOOL" 20' B.T.H. RUELLIA PENINSULARIS DESERT RUELLIA 5 GALLON YUCCA RUPICOLA TWISTED LEAF YUCCA 5 GALLON SLENDER LADY PALMRHAPIS EXCELSA 24" BOX RHAPHIOLEPIS "MAJESTIC BEAUTY" INDIA HAWTHORN 15 GALLONRh Y HYBRID BERMUDA"TIF-GREEN" - OR EQUAL SOD MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD LOW LOW MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD HIGHIF TURF IS PLANTED IN WINTER CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY SOD IS OVER-SEEDED WITH PERENNIAL RYE BLUE PALO VERDE FRUITLESS OLIVE DATE PALM THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITE AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA" BUDDLEIA MARRUBIFOLIA CAESALPINIA PULCHERRIMA CALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN' CALLIANDRA CALIFORNICA FOUQUIERIA SPLENDENS HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA MUHLENBERGIA "REGAL MIST" ROCK COBBLE: 3"-5" MEXICAN BEACH COBBLE TO MATCH COBBLE IN ADJACENT MEDIANS ON JEFFERSON VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT DESERT BUTTERFLY BUSH RED BIRD OF PARADISE DWARF CALLISTEMON BAJA FAIRY DUSTER OCOTILLO RED YUCCA PINK MUHLY CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM OLEA EUROPEA "WILSONII" PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA PROSOPIS CHILENSIS Mu Ca H 5 GALLON BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 5 GALLON 20' B.T.H. CC C F 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 15 GALLON 5 GALLON A 5 GALLON 24" BOX LOW MOD BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'ROSENKA'1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. LOW MOD LOW LOW LOW5 GALLON DAYLILYHEMEROCALLIS "LITTLE BOBO"1 GALLON @ 18" O.C. CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 5 GALLON LOWCB LEUCOPHYLLUM "GREEN CLOUD" TEXAS RANGER LOW5 GALLON MOD LE SPREADING LANTANALANTANA "SPREADING SUNSET"1 GALLON @ 12" O.C. SPREADING LANTANALANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS 1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. MOD LOW MAYTENUS PHYLLANTHOIDES MANGLE DULCE 5 GALLON LOWMy DALEA F. "SIERRA NEGRA" DALEA 5 GALLON LOWD LOWBU 60" BOX LOW 24" BOX LOW BOUGAINVILLEA BRASILIENSIS BOUGAINVILLEA 15 GALLON MODB AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA"VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT 15 GALLON LOWAG 3" DEPTH DECOMPOSED GRANITE: 'PALOMINO CORAL' BY SOUTHWEST BOULDER TO L.A. PRIOR TO ORDERING 30% - 5/8" MINUS / 70% - 5/8" SCREENED CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLE IN ALL PLANTER AREAS CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 15 GALLON LOWCB BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 15 GALLON MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW SPECIES LBS / ACRE ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM COLLINSIA HEEROPHYLLA GAILLARDIA PULCHELLA ESCHSCHOLZIA CALIFORNICA LASTHENIA CALIFORNICA GAZANIA SPLENDENS VERBENA TENUISECTA LOTUS CORNICULATUS TRIFOLIUM FRAGIFERUM 'O CONNORS' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'CARPET SNOW' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'ROYAL CARPET' 0.2 4 4 1.5 0.2 8 4 5 8 3 5 PRODUCT LBS / ACRE -CONWED 100% WOOD FIBER -ECOLOGY CONTROLS M-BINDER -AM-120 MYCORRHIZAL INOCULUM DESERT SUITE -SEED MIX AS SPECIFIED - SUPPLIED BY S&S SEEDS 2000 150 60 SLURRY COMPONENTS CONTACT S & S SEEDS AT 805-684-0436 BOTANICAL NAME VINES SIZECOMMON NAMESYM TREES PLANT LEGEND GROUNDCOVER WATER USE SHRUBS N O R T HScale: 1"=20'L-6 drawn: checked: scale: date: DSN 7.6.18PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANESP / BLLA QUINTABEAZER HOMES1800 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CA 92821 (714) 672-7003David ASSOCIATES Inc.EAULT www.dnassociates.com 951 296 3430 sheet SIGNATURE RENEWAL DATE DATE 06-30-2018 S TATEOF CA L I F O RNIALICENSEDLA ND SCAPE AR C H I T ECTDavidS.N eault N o. 2 88441877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 140 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANTOTAL PROJECT AREA: 926,811 SQ FT TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA: 163,131 SQ FT / 18% OF SITE TOTAL TURF AREA: 7,486 SQ FT / 5% OF LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION NOTES 1. DESIGNS WILL COMPLY WITH CITY OF LA QUINTA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT'S LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN ORDINANCE 2. ALL TURF WITHIN 2' OF HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUB-SURFACE DRIP. ALL TURF 2' OR GREATER FROM HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH ROTOR/SPRAY. ALL LANDSCAPE TO BE IRRIGATED WITH DRIP. 3. ET BASED CONTROLLERS WILL BE USED ON SITE MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-9 0 20' 40' 80'MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-7MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-5 130 154 131 133 252 127 229 232 328 351 353 H L DDDDDDLLLLLHHHHH D CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB LL L LLHHHH HHH H HHHH Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca CaCa Ca Ca Ca Ca CaCaCaCaCa H H H H H H H H L L L L L L CCC My My My My My My LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE CB CB CB BU BU BU BU RuRu Ru Ru Ru H Mu Mu Mu Ru LE LE LE LE LE LE H H HH Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu BU H Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru CC H H H H H H H H H H H H H HMuMuMuMuMuMuMu VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY VINES SHOWN ON OUTSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY MAINTENANCE HEADER VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY CALIF. FAN PALM BOUGAINVILLEA "ROSENKA" HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA BOUGAINVILLEA RED YUCCA WASHINGTONIA FILIFERA H 15 GALLON LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 5 GALLON L BOUGAINVILLEA "TORCH GLOW" BOUGAINVILLEA 5 GALLOND 16' B.T.H. CAT'S CLAW VINEMACFADYENA UNGUIS-CATI 5 GALLON 5 GALLON BOTTLE TREEBRACHYCHITON POPULNEUS 24" BOX LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 15 GALLON B L LE HYDRO-SEED MIX - SEE MIX BELOW BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 36" BOX THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITEPROSOPIS CHILENSIS 24" BOX BUXUS MICROPHYLLA KOREANA KOREAN BOXWOOD 15 GALLONBX FEIJOA SELLOWIANA PINEAPPLE GUAVA 15 GALLONFe BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 24" BOX CARISSA "EMERALD CARPET" NATAL PLUM 5 GALLONC Ru LEUCOPHYLLUM LAEVEGATUM CHIHUAHUAN SAGE 5 GALLON AFRICAN SUMAC RHUS LANCEA 24" BOX DATE PALMPHOENIX D. "MEDJOOL" 20' B.T.H. RUELLIA PENINSULARIS DESERT RUELLIA 5 GALLON YUCCA RUPICOLA TWISTED LEAF YUCCA 5 GALLON SLENDER LADY PALMRHAPIS EXCELSA 24" BOX RHAPHIOLEPIS "MAJESTIC BEAUTY" INDIA HAWTHORN 15 GALLONRh Y HYBRID BERMUDA"TIF-GREEN" - OR EQUAL SOD MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD LOW LOW MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD HIGHIF TURF IS PLANTED IN WINTER CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY SOD IS OVER-SEEDED WITH PERENNIAL RYE BLUE PALO VERDE FRUITLESS OLIVE DATE PALM THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITE AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA" BUDDLEIA MARRUBIFOLIA CAESALPINIA PULCHERRIMA CALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN' CALLIANDRA CALIFORNICA FOUQUIERIA SPLENDENS HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA MUHLENBERGIA "REGAL MIST" ROCK COBBLE: 3"-5" MEXICAN BEACH COBBLE TO MATCH COBBLE IN ADJACENT MEDIANS ON JEFFERSON VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT DESERT BUTTERFLY BUSH RED BIRD OF PARADISE DWARF CALLISTEMON BAJA FAIRY DUSTER OCOTILLO RED YUCCA PINK MUHLY CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM OLEA EUROPEA "WILSONII" PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA PROSOPIS CHILENSIS Mu Ca H 5 GALLON BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 5 GALLON 20' B.T.H. CC C F 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 15 GALLON 5 GALLON A 5 GALLON 24" BOX LOW MOD BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'ROSENKA' 1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. LOW MOD LOW LOW LOW5 GALLON DAYLILYHEMEROCALLIS "LITTLE BOBO"1 GALLON @ 18" O.C. CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 5 GALLON LOWCB LEUCOPHYLLUM "GREEN CLOUD" TEXAS RANGER LOW5 GALLON MOD LE SPREADING LANTANALANTANA "SPREADING SUNSET"1 GALLON @ 12" O.C. SPREADING LANTANALANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS 1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. MOD LOW MAYTENUS PHYLLANTHOIDES MANGLE DULCE 5 GALLON LOWMy DALEA F. "SIERRA NEGRA" DALEA 5 GALLON LOWD LOWBU 60" BOX LOW 24" BOX LOW BOUGAINVILLEA BRASILIENSIS BOUGAINVILLEA 15 GALLON MODB AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA"VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT 15 GALLON LOWAG 3" DEPTH DECOMPOSED GRANITE: 'PALOMINO CORAL' BY SOUTHWEST BOULDER TO L.A. PRIOR TO ORDERING 30% - 5/8" MINUS / 70% - 5/8" SCREENED CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLE IN ALL PLANTER AREAS CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 15 GALLON LOWCB BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 15 GALLON MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW SPECIES LBS / ACRE ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM COLLINSIA HEEROPHYLLA GAILLARDIA PULCHELLA ESCHSCHOLZIA CALIFORNICA LASTHENIA CALIFORNICA GAZANIA SPLENDENS VERBENA TENUISECTA LOTUS CORNICULATUS TRIFOLIUM FRAGIFERUM 'O CONNORS' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'CARPET SNOW' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'ROYAL CARPET' 0.2 4 4 1.5 0.2 8 4 5 8 3 5 PRODUCT LBS / ACRE -CONWED 100% WOOD FIBER -ECOLOGY CONTROLS M-BINDER -AM-120 MYCORRHIZAL INOCULUM DESERT SUITE -SEED MIX AS SPECIFIED - SUPPLIED BY S&S SEEDS 2000 150 60 SLURRY COMPONENTS CONTACT S & S SEEDS AT 805-684-0436 BOTANICAL NAME VINES SIZECOMMON NAMESYM TREES PLANT LEGEND GROUNDCOVER WATER USE SHRUBS N O R T HScale: 1"=20'L-7 drawn: checked: scale: date: DSN 7.6.18PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANESP / BLLA QUINTABEAZER HOMES1800 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CA 92821 (714) 672-7003David ASSOCIATES Inc.EAULT www.dnassociates.com 951 296 3430 sheet SIGNATURE RENEWAL DATE DATE 06-30-2018 S TATEOF CA L I F O RNIALICENSEDLA ND SCAPE AR C H I T ECTDavidS.N eault N o. 2 88441877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 140 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANTOTAL PROJECT AREA: 926,811 SQ FT TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA: 163,131 SQ FT / 18% OF SITE TOTAL TURF AREA: 7,486 SQ FT / 5% OF LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION NOTES 1. DESIGNS WILL COMPLY WITH CITY OF LA QUINTA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT'S LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN ORDINANCE 2. ALL TURF WITHIN 2' OF HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUB-SURFACE DRIP. ALL TURF 2' OR GREATER FROM HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH ROTOR/SPRAY. ALL LANDSCAPE TO BE IRRIGATED WITH DRIP. 3. ET BASED CONTROLLERS WILL BE USED ON SITE MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-10 0 20' 40' 80'MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-6PROPOSED GOLF CART PATH TO CITRUS COUNTRY CLUB 2R41536 17 28 39 110 211 312 175 182 374 381 D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D L L L L L L L L LLLLLLLLLLL CBCB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB My My MyMy M HHHHHHHH HHHHHHH H CB CB CB CB CB CB CBCB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB My My My MyMy My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My D D D D D D D DD D D D D Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru CaCaCaCaCaCa Ca Ca CaCaCaCaHHHHHHHHHHCaCaCa My My My My My My CaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCa HHH H H H H H H H HH H HH HHH HHH H DD D D D D Ru Ru Ru RuRu BU BU BU BU BU BU BU BU BUBU BU BU BU D DD D D D MuMuMuMuMuMuMu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu RuRu RuRu Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru BUMuMuMu Mu Mu MuMu MuMuMu MuMu MuMuMuMuMuMuMuMuMuMuMuRuRuRuRuRuRuRu Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu MuMuMu Mu Mu Mu MuMu CC CCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHHHHH H HHHCCCCCCCCCCCC CB C CCCCMyMyMyMyMyMy BUBUBUBUBUBU C C C MyMyMyMyLELELELELELELELELELELELECBCBCBCBCBCBCBCBCBCBCBCBMyMyMyMyMyMyMy BUBUCCCCCCCCCCCCCCAAAAAA F D D D D D D Ru Ru Ru Ru RuRu Ru Ru Ru BUBU BU BU BU BU LELELELELELELELE LELELECB H H HHHHH HHHHHHHMu MuMu Mu Mu MuMuMu HH H HCB HH LECB Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY V O VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY CALIF. FAN PALM BOUGAINVILLEA "ROSENKA" HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA BOUGAINVILLEA RED YUCCA WASHINGTONIA FILIFERA H 15 GALLON LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 5 GALLON L BOUGAINVILLEA "TORCH GLOW" BOUGAINVILLEA 5 GALLOND 16' B.T.H. CAT'S CLAW VINEMACFADYENA UNGUIS-CATI 5 GALLON 5 GALLON BOTTLE TREEBRACHYCHITON POPULNEUS 24" BOX LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 15 GALLON B L LE HYDRO-SEED MIX - SEE MIX BELOW BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 36" BOX THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITEPROSOPIS CHILENSIS 24" BOX BUXUS MICROPHYLLA KOREANA KOREAN BOXWOOD 15 GALLONBX FEIJOA SELLOWIANA PINEAPPLE GUAVA 15 GALLONFe BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 24" BOX CARISSA "EMERALD CARPET" NATAL PLUM 5 GALLONC Ru LEUCOPHYLLUM LAEVEGATUM CHIHUAHUAN SAGE 5 GALLON AFRICAN SUMAC RHUS LANCEA 24" BOX DATE PALMPHOENIX D. "MEDJOOL" 20' B.T.H. RUELLIA PENINSULARIS DESERT RUELLIA 5 GALLON YUCCA RUPICOLA TWISTED LEAF YUCCA 5 GALLON SLENDER LADY PALMRHAPIS EXCELSA 24" BOX RHAPHIOLEPIS "MAJESTIC BEAUTY" INDIA HAWTHORN 15 GALLONRh Y HYBRID BERMUDA"TIF-GREEN" - OR EQUAL SOD MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD LOW LOW MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD HIGHIF TURF IS PLANTED IN WINTER CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY SOD IS OVER-SEEDED WITH PERENNIAL RYE BLUE PALO VERDE FRUITLESS OLIVE DATE PALM THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITE AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA" BUDDLEIA MARRUBIFOLIA CAESALPINIA PULCHERRIMA CALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN' CALLIANDRA CALIFORNICA FOUQUIERIA SPLENDENS HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA MUHLENBERGIA "REGAL MIST" ROCK COBBLE: 3"-5" MEXICAN BEACH COBBLE TO MATCH COBBLE IN ADJACENT MEDIANS ON JEFFERSON VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT DESERT BUTTERFLY BUSH RED BIRD OF PARADISE DWARF CALLISTEMON BAJA FAIRY DUSTER OCOTILLO RED YUCCA PINK MUHLY CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM OLEA EUROPEA "WILSONII" PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA PROSOPIS CHILENSIS Mu Ca H 5 GALLON BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 5 GALLON 20' B.T.H. CC C F 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 15 GALLON 5 GALLON A 5 GALLON 24" BOX LOW MOD BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'ROSENKA' 1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. LOW MOD LOW LOW LOW5 GALLON DAYLILYHEMEROCALLIS "LITTLE BOBO"1 GALLON @ 18" O.C. CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 5 GALLON LOWCB LEUCOPHYLLUM "GREEN CLOUD" TEXAS RANGER LOW5 GALLON MOD LE SPREADING LANTANALANTANA "SPREADING SUNSET"1 GALLON @ 12" O.C. SPREADING LANTANALANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS 1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. MOD LOW MAYTENUS PHYLLANTHOIDES MANGLE DULCE 5 GALLON LOWMy DALEA F. "SIERRA NEGRA" DALEA 5 GALLON LOWD LOWBU 60" BOX LOW 24" BOX LOW BOUGAINVILLEA BRASILIENSIS BOUGAINVILLEA 15 GALLON MODB AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA"VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT 15 GALLON LOWAG 3" DEPTH DECOMPOSED GRANITE: 'PALOMINO CORAL' BY SOUTHWEST BOULDER TO L.A. PRIOR TO ORDERING 30% - 5/8" MINUS / 70% - 5/8" SCREENED CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLE IN ALL PLANTER AREAS CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 15 GALLON LOWCB BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 15 GALLON MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW SPECIES LBS / ACRE ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM COLLINSIA HEEROPHYLLA GAILLARDIA PULCHELLA ESCHSCHOLZIA CALIFORNICA LASTHENIA CALIFORNICA GAZANIA SPLENDENS VERBENA TENUISECTA LOTUS CORNICULATUS TRIFOLIUM FRAGIFERUM 'O CONNORS' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'CARPET SNOW' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'ROYAL CARPET' 0.2 4 4 1.5 0.2 8 4 5 8 3 5 PRODUCT LBS / ACRE -CONWED 100% WOOD FIBER -ECOLOGY CONTROLS M-BINDER -AM-120 MYCORRHIZAL INOCULUM DESERT SUITE -SEED MIX AS SPECIFIED - SUPPLIED BY S&S SEEDS 2000 150 60 SLURRY COMPONENTS CONTACT S & S SEEDS AT 805-684-0436 BOTANICAL NAME VINES SIZECOMMON NAMESYM TREES PLANT LEGEND GROUNDCOVER WATER USE SHRUBS N O R T HScale: 1"=20'L-8 drawn: checked: scale: date: DSN 7.6.18PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANESP / BLLA QUINTABEAZER HOMES1800 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CA 92821 (714) 672-7003David ASSOCIATES Inc.EAULT www.dnassociates.com 951 296 3430 sheet SIGNATURE RENEWAL DATE DATE 06-30-2018 S TATEOF CA L I F O RNIALICENSEDLA ND SCAPE AR C H I T ECTDavidS.N eault N o. 2 88441877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 140 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANTOTAL PROJECT AREA: 926,811 SQ FT TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA: 163,131 SQ FT / 18% OF SITE TOTAL TURF AREA: 7,486 SQ FT / 5% OF LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION NOTES 1. DESIGNS WILL COMPLY WITH CITY OF LA QUINTA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT'S LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN ORDINANCE 2. ALL TURF WITHIN 2' OF HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUB-SURFACE DRIP. ALL TURF 2' OR GREATER FROM HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH ROTOR/SPRAY. ALL LANDSCAPE TO BE IRRIGATED WITH DRIP. 3. ET BASED CONTROLLERS WILL BE USED ON SITE MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-5 0 20' 40' 80'MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-9BASIN AVENUE 52 21 32 13 160 173 143 344 246 261 272 245 359 3 3 371 BBBBBBB BBBBBB LLLLLL LL H L D D D D D D L L L L L HHHHHH H D H H H H D Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca CaCa Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca CaCaCa D D D D D D D D D D D D My My My My My My Ru Ru Ru Ru BUBUBU BU BU Ru DD H Ru H BUBUBU RuRu H H H H H H H H H H H D D D BU BUBU BU BU BU BU BU H H HH H H H My My My My My CaCa CaCaCaMyMyMyMyMyMy BU BU BU BU BU Ru Ru Ru Ru Mu Mu LE LE LE LE LE My My My My My HHH H HHHHH BU BU BU BU BU BU BU BU BUBU BU BU BU BU BU Ru BU BU Ru BU BU BU BU LE LE LE Ru Ru BXBXBXBX BXBXBXBX BXBXBXBX BXBXBXBX BXBXBXBX Mu FeFeFeFeFe Fe FeFeFeFe Fe FeFe Fe Fe Fe Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC BXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBX BXBXBXBX BXBXBXBX BXBXBXBX BXBXBXBX BXBXBXBX FeFe Fe FeFeFeFeFeFe Fe FeFe Fe Fe Fe Fe D D D D D D D D Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca BUCa D D D D D D D D D Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca CaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCa CaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCa Ca Ca Ru LE LELE LE LE Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu HH HHHH D D D D D D D DDD H H Mu Mu MuMu My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My My D DDD D D D D D DD D Mu MuMuMuMuMu MuMuMuMu Mu MuMu Mu Mu Mu L L L L L D D LELE LE LELELE LELELE LE LEMy MyMy My MyMy MyMyMy BUBUBUBU BU BU BUBU BU BUBU BU BU BUBUBU MuMuMuMuMuMuMu Mu Mu Ca CaCaCaCaCaCaCa CB CB Ca Ca CaCaa CaCaCaCa CaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCaCa BXBXBXBX BXBXBXBX BX BX Fe Fe Rh Rh Rh Rh Rh Rh Rh RhRhRh Rh Rh Rh Rh Rh Rh YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY YYYYYYYYY Y YY Rh Y YYY DDDDDDDDDDLLLLLLLLL BB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB LL L L LL LLLLLL LLLLL F H H H H H A AA A CCCC CCCC CBCBCBCBCBCBCBCBCB Ru Ru Ru Ru RuRu Ru Ru Ru C C C C Ru RuRu Ru Ru RuRu LE LE LE LE LE LE LE MyMyMyMyMyMyMyMyMyMyMy A AA AA D D D D D D D D BU BU BU BU BU BU BU BU BU CCCC H F H A A A A A H H H HCC C H H H H H B CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB LELELE CC CC CCCC MuMuMu B AG AG BB BBB CBCBCBCBCB CB RuRuRuRuRuRu CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CBCBCBCBCB CBCBCBCBCB CB CB CB Ru RuRu Ru Ru Ru Ru RuRuRu Mu Mu MuMu Mu Mu Mu MuMuMu MuMu MuMu Mu Mu Mu Mu MuMuMu Mu MuMu Mu Ru Ru RuRu Ru RuRu Ru VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY TRAIN VINES ONTO ARBORS TRAIN VINES ONTO ARBORS VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY MAINTENANCE HEADER VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY CALIF. FAN PALM BOUGAINVILLEA "ROSENKA" HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA BOUGAINVILLEA RED YUCCA WASHINGTONIA FILIFERA H 15 GALLON LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 5 GALLON L BOUGAINVILLEA "TORCH GLOW" BOUGAINVILLEA 5 GALLOND 16' B.T.H. CAT'S CLAW VINEMACFADYENA UNGUIS-CATI 5 GALLON 5 GALLON BOTTLE TREEBRACHYCHITON POPULNEUS 24" BOX LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 15 GALLON B L LE HYDRO-SEED MIX - SEE MIX BELOW BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 36" BOX THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITEPROSOPIS CHILENSIS 24" BOX BUXUS MICROPHYLLA KOREANA KOREAN BOXWOOD 15 GALLONBX FEIJOA SELLOWIANA PINEAPPLE GUAVA 15 GALLONFe BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 24" BOX CARISSA "EMERALD CARPET" NATAL PLUM 5 GALLON C Ru LEUCOPHYLLUM LAEVEGATUM CHIHUAHUAN SAGE 5 GALLON AFRICAN SUMAC RHUS LANCEA 24" BOX DATE PALMPHOENIX D. "MEDJOOL" 20' B.T.H. RUELLIA PENINSULARIS DESERT RUELLIA 5 GALLON YUCCA RUPICOLA TWISTED LEAF YUCCA 5 GALLON SLENDER LADY PALMRHAPIS EXCELSA 24" BOX RHAPHIOLEPIS "MAJESTIC BEAUTY" INDIA HAWTHORN 15 GALLONRh Y HYBRID BERMUDA"TIF-GREEN" - OR EQUAL SOD MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD LOW LOW MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD HIGHIF TURF IS PLANTED IN WINTER CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY SOD IS OVER-SEEDED WITH PERENNIAL RYE BLUE PALO VERDE FRUITLESS OLIVE DATE PALM THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITE AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA" BUDDLEIA MARRUBIFOLIA CAESALPINIA PULCHERRIMA CALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN' CALLIANDRA CALIFORNICA FOUQUIERIA SPLENDENS HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA MUHLENBERGIA "REGAL MIST" ROCK COBBLE: 3"-5" MEXICAN BEACH COBBLE TO MATCH COBBLE IN ADJACENT MEDIANS ON JEFFERSON VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT DESERT BUTTERFLY BUSH RED BIRD OF PARADISE DWARF CALLISTEMON BAJA FAIRY DUSTER OCOTILLO RED YUCCA PINK MUHLY CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM OLEA EUROPEA "WILSONII" PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA PROSOPIS CHILENSIS Mu Ca H 5 GALLON BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 5 GALLON 20' B.T.H. CC C F 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 15 GALLON 5 GALLON A 5 GALLON 24" BOX LOW MOD BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'ROSENKA'1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. LOW MOD LOW LOW LOW5 GALLON DAYLILYHEMEROCALLIS "LITTLE BOBO"1 GALLON @ 18" O.C. CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 5 GALLON LOWCB LEUCOPHYLLUM "GREEN CLOUD" TEXAS RANGER LOW5 GALLON MOD LE SPREADING LANTANALANTANA "SPREADING SUNSET"1 GALLON @ 12" O.C. SPREADING LANTANALANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS 1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. MOD LOW MAYTENUS PHYLLANTHOIDES MANGLE DULCE 5 GALLON LOWMy DALEA F. "SIERRA NEGRA" DALEA 5 GALLON LOWD LOWBU 60" BOX LOW 24" BOX LOW BOUGAINVILLEA BRASILIENSIS BOUGAINVILLEA 15 GALLON MODB AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA"VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT 15 GALLON LOWAG 3" DEPTH DECOMPOSED GRANITE: 'PALOMINO CORAL' BY SOUTHWEST BOULDER TO L.A. PRIOR TO ORDERING 30% - 5/8" MINUS / 70% - 5/8" SCREENED CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLE IN ALL PLANTER AREAS CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 15 GALLON LOWCB BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 15 GALLON MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW SPECIES LBS / ACRE ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM COLLINSIA HEEROPHYLLA GAILLARDIA PULCHELLA ESCHSCHOLZIA CALIFORNICA LASTHENIA CALIFORNICA GAZANIA SPLENDENS VERBENA TENUISECTA LOTUS CORNICULATUS TRIFOLIUM FRAGIFERUM 'O CONNORS' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'CARPET SNOW' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'ROYAL CARPET' 0.2 4 4 1.5 0.2 8 4 5 8 3 5 PRODUCT LBS / ACRE -CONWED 100% WOOD FIBER -ECOLOGY CONTROLS M-BINDER -AM-120 MYCORRHIZAL INOCULUM DESERT SUITE -SEED MIX AS SPECIFIED - SUPPLIED BY S&S SEEDS 2000 150 60 SLURRY COMPONENTS CONTACT S & S SEEDS AT 805-684-0436 BOTANICAL NAME VINES SIZECOMMON NAMESYM TREES PLANT LEGEND GROUNDCOVER WATER USE SHRUBS N O R T HScale: 1"=20'L-9 drawn: checked: scale: date: DSN 7.6.18PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANESP / BLLA QUINTABEAZER HOMES1800 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CA 92821 (714) 672-7003David ASSOCIATES Inc.EAULT www.dnassociates.com 951 296 3430 sheet SIGNATURE RENEWAL DATE DATE 06-30-2018 S TATEOF CA L I F O RNIALICENSEDLA ND SCAPE AR C H I T ECTDavidS.N eault N o. 2 88441877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 140 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANTOTAL PROJECT AREA: 926,811 SQ FT TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA: 163,131 SQ FT / 18% OF SITE TOTAL TURF AREA: 7,486 SQ FT / 5% OF LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION NOTES 1. DESIGNS WILL COMPLY WITH CITY OF LA QUINTA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT'S LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN ORDINANCE 2. ALL TURF WITHIN 2' OF HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUB-SURFACE DRIP. ALL TURF 2' OR GREATER FROM HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH ROTOR/SPRAY. ALL LANDSCAPE TO BE IRRIGATED WITH DRIP. 3. ET BASED CONTROLLERS WILL BE USED ON SITE MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-6 RECREATION AREA 0 20' 40' 80' BASIN MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-10MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-8AVENUE 52 140 148 150 158 234 236 238 356 341 247 255 257 335 337 339 342 349 HLDDDDDDLLLLL H H H H H H HD H HLDDDDDDLLLLL H H H H H H CC u EF LE LE LE CB CB CB CB CB CB CBCB CB CB CB CB MyMy My MyMyMyMyMyMyMy My LE LE LE LELE LE LE LEFF F D F D D DDD D BUBU BU BUBU BUBU BU BU BU CCCC CCCC CC CCCC CC CC A A A A A HHHHHHH Mu Mu Mu Mu MuMu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu D D D H H H H H H H H H H HH H H H H HHH H H H LE HLE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca H F F A AA AA CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB CB My My My My My My My My Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru BUBUBU BU BU BU BU BU BUBUBU H HH H H CC CCCC CC CC CC CC CC CC CCCC H H H H H Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru HH H H H H HHH H HH CC H H H Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru RuRu Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru RuRu Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru Ru VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY MAINTENANCE HEADER VINES SHOWN ON INSIDE OF WALL FOR CLARITY CALIF. FAN PALM BOUGAINVILLEA "ROSENKA" HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA BOUGAINVILLEA RED YUCCA WASHINGTONIA FILIFERA H 15 GALLON LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 5 GALLON L BOUGAINVILLEA "TORCH GLOW" BOUGAINVILLEA 5 GALLOND 16' B.T.H. CAT'S CLAW VINEMACFADYENA UNGUIS-CATI 5 GALLON 5 GALLON BOTTLE TREEBRACHYCHITON POPULNEUS 24" BOX LANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 15 GALLON B L LE HYDRO-SEED MIX - SEE MIX BELOW BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 36" BOX THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITEPROSOPIS CHILENSIS 24" BOX BUXUS MICROPHYLLA KOREANA KOREAN BOXWOOD 15 GALLONBX FEIJOA SELLOWIANA PINEAPPLE GUAVA 15 GALLONFe BLUE PALO VERDECERCIDIUM "DESERT MUSEUM" 24" BOX CARISSA "EMERALD CARPET" NATAL PLUM 5 GALLONC Ru LEUCOPHYLLUM LAEVEGATUM CHIHUAHUAN SAGE 5 GALLON AFRICAN SUMAC RHUS LANCEA 24" BOX DATE PALMPHOENIX D. "MEDJOOL" 20' B.T.H. RUELLIA PENINSULARIS DESERT RUELLIA 5 GALLON YUCCA RUPICOLA TWISTED LEAF YUCCA 5 GALLON SLENDER LADY PALMRHAPIS EXCELSA 24" BOX RHAPHIOLEPIS "MAJESTIC BEAUTY" INDIA HAWTHORN 15 GALLONRh Y HYBRID BERMUDA"TIF-GREEN" - OR EQUAL SOD MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD LOW LOW MOD LOW MOD MOD MOD LOW MOD MOD HIGHIF TURF IS PLANTED IN WINTER CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY SOD IS OVER-SEEDED WITH PERENNIAL RYE BLUE PALO VERDE FRUITLESS OLIVE DATE PALM THORNLESS CHILEAN MESQUITE AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA" BUDDLEIA MARRUBIFOLIA CAESALPINIA PULCHERRIMA CALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN' CALLIANDRA CALIFORNICA FOUQUIERIA SPLENDENS HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA MUHLENBERGIA "REGAL MIST" ROCK COBBLE: 3"-5" MEXICAN BEACH COBBLE TO MATCH COBBLE IN ADJACENT MEDIANS ON JEFFERSON VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT DESERT BUTTERFLY BUSH RED BIRD OF PARADISE DWARF CALLISTEMON BAJA FAIRY DUSTER OCOTILLO RED YUCCA PINK MUHLY CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM OLEA EUROPEA "WILSONII" PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA PROSOPIS CHILENSIS Mu Ca H 5 GALLON BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 5 GALLON 20' B.T.H. CC C F 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 15 GALLON 5 GALLON A 5 GALLON 24" BOX LOW MOD BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'ROSENKA'1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. LOW MOD LOW LOW LOW5 GALLON DAYLILYHEMEROCALLIS "LITTLE BOBO"1 GALLON @ 18" O.C. CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 5 GALLON LOWCB LEUCOPHYLLUM "GREEN CLOUD" TEXAS RANGER LOW5 GALLON MOD LE SPREADING LANTANALANTANA "SPREADING SUNSET"1 GALLON @ 12" O.C. SPREADING LANTANALANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS 1 GALLON @ 24" O.C. MOD LOW MAYTENUS PHYLLANTHOIDES MANGLE DULCE 5 GALLON LOWMy DALEA F. "SIERRA NEGRA" DALEA 5 GALLON LOWD LOWBU 60" BOX LOW 24" BOX LOW BOUGAINVILLEA BRASILIENSIS BOUGAINVILLEA 15 GALLON MODB AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA"VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT 15 GALLON LOWAG 3" DEPTH DECOMPOSED GRANITE: 'PALOMINO CORAL' BY SOUTHWEST BOULDER TO L.A. PRIOR TO ORDERING 30% - 5/8" MINUS / 70% - 5/8" SCREENED CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLE IN ALL PLANTER AREAS CORDIA BOISSIERI TEXAS OLIVE 15 GALLON LOWCB BOUGAINVILLEABOUGAINVILLEA 'LA JOLLA' 15 GALLON MOD MOD MOD MOD MOD LOW SPECIES LBS / ACRE ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM COLLINSIA HEEROPHYLLA GAILLARDIA PULCHELLA ESCHSCHOLZIA CALIFORNICA LASTHENIA CALIFORNICA GAZANIA SPLENDENS VERBENA TENUISECTA LOTUS CORNICULATUS TRIFOLIUM FRAGIFERUM 'O CONNORS' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'CARPET SNOW' LOBULARIA MARITIMA 'ROYAL CARPET' 0.2 4 4 1.5 0.2 8 4 5 8 3 5 PRODUCT LBS / ACRE -CONWED 100% WOOD FIBER -ECOLOGY CONTROLS M-BINDER -AM-120 MYCORRHIZAL INOCULUM DESERT SUITE -SEED MIX AS SPECIFIED - SUPPLIED BY S&S SEEDS 2000 150 60 SLURRY COMPONENTS CONTACT S & S SEEDS AT 805-684-0436 BOTANICAL NAME VINES SIZECOMMON NAMESYM TREES PLANT LEGEND GROUNDCOVER WATER USE SHRUBS N O R T HScale: 1"=20'L-10 drawn: checked: scale: date: DSN 7.6.18PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANESP / BLLA QUINTABEAZER HOMES1800 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CA 92821 (714) 672-7003David ASSOCIATES Inc.EAULT www.dnassociates.com 951 296 3430 sheet SIGNATURE RENEWAL DATE DATE 06-30-2018 S TATEOF CA L I F O RNIALICENSEDLA ND SCAPE AR C H I T ECTDavidS.N eault N o. 2 88441877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 140 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANTOTAL PROJECT AREA: 926,811 SQ FT TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA: 163,131 SQ FT / 18% OF SITE TOTAL TURF AREA: 7,486 SQ FT / 5% OF LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION NOTES 1. DESIGNS WILL COMPLY WITH CITY OF LA QUINTA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT'S LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN ORDINANCE 2. ALL TURF WITHIN 2' OF HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUB-SURFACE DRIP. ALL TURF 2' OR GREATER FROM HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH ROTOR/SPRAY. ALL LANDSCAPE TO BE IRRIGATED WITH DRIP. 3. ET BASED CONTROLLERS WILL BE USED ON SITE MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-7 0 20' 40' 80' AVENUE 52MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET L-9JEFFERSON STREET A AA 3 3 3EEEEE LLLLL L L L L Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu Mu B B B BB BB BB B BBB B B B BBBB D D D D 11 DA DA DA RoRoRo RoRo RRR RRRRRRHHH LE LE LE LE CaCaCa HHg D D CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP Bo Bo Bo Bo Bo Bo RR R R R RRHHH CP R R Ag Ag Ag 2 2 2 Rt Rt Rt Rt 2 Rt Rt Rt Rt Rt RtRtRt D D D D D D D D HHSHRUBS NOTESBOTANICAL NAME VINES SIZE SWEET ACACIA BLUE PALO VERDE CALIFORNIA PEPPER COMMON NAMESYM TREES PLANT LEGEND AGAVE AMERICANA "MEDIO-PICTA" BULBINE F. "HALLMARK" BOUGAINVILLEA "TORCH GLOW" CALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN' EUONYMUS "SILVER KING" HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS ROSMARINUS "TUSCAN BLUE" VARIEGATED CENTURY PLANT BULBINE TORCH GLOW BOUGAINVILLEA DWARF CALLISTEMON EUONYMUS RED YUCCA DEER GRASS UPRIGHT ROSEMARY ACACIA SMALLII CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM SCHINUS MOLLE GROUNDCOVER Mu MULTI, 10' HT. X 6' HEAD -2" CALIPER Ca H 5 GALLON SPACING AS SHOWN Bo E 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 24" BOX STANDARD, 10' HT. X 4' HEAD -2" CALIPER A 5 GALLON 2" DEPTH DECOMPOSED GRANITE: 'PALOMINO CORAL' BY SOUTHWEST BOULDER AS SHOWN AS SHOWN AS SHOWN AS SHOWN AS SHOWNLANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS TRAILING LANTANA 1 GALLON FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 6" HT X 9" WD FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WD5 GALLON CORDIA PARVIFOLIA LITTLE LEAF CORDIA 5 GALLON AS SHOWN FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WDCP LEUCOPHYLLUM LAEVIGATUM CHIHUAHUAN SAGE AS SHOWN FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WD5 GALLONLE Rt FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WD FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WD 5 GALLON AS SHOWN AS SHOWN AS SHOWN FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WD FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WD ROSA "ICEBERG" WHITE SHRUB ROSE 5 GALLON FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WDAS SHOWN DALEA F. "SIERRA NEGRA" DALEA 5 GALLON AS SHOWN FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WDD AS SHOWN FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WDB CAT'S CLAW VINEMACFADYENA UNGUIS-CATI 5 GALLON FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, ATTACH TO WALL AS SHOWN 24" BOX AS SHOWN 24" BOX FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WD 30% - 7/16" - 5/8" / 70% - 3/8" MINUS - CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLE TO L.A. PRIOR TO ORDERING VERTICAL ACCENTS ALOE BANESEII DRACAENA DRACO CORDYLINE BAUERI BANESEI ALOE DRAGON TREE BAUERES DRACAENA 5 GALLON 5 GALLON 5 GALLON AS SHOWN AS SHOWN AS SHOWN FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 4' HT X 12" WD FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 4' HT X 12" WD FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 4' HT X 12" WD 1 2 3 DASYLIRION WHEELERI DESERT SPOON 5 GALLON AS SHOWN FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WDDA Ro ROSA "FLOWER CARPET RED" RED SHRUB ROSE 1 GALLON FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 10" HT X 10" WDAS SHOWNR AS SHOWNLANTANA C. "RADIATION" LANTANA 5 GALLONL FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WD MULTI, 10' HT. X 6' HEAD -2" CALIPER 5 GALLON AS SHOWN FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WD ZAUSCHNERIA CALIFORNICA CALIFORNIA FUSCHIA FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WD1 GALLON AS SHOWN AGAVE WEBERI SMOOTH-EDGED AGAVE 5 GALLON AS SHOWN FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WDAg ALOE "BLUE ELF" BLUE ELF ALOE 1 GALLON AS SHOWN FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 18" HT X 18" WD AS SHOWNLANTANA "SPREADING SUNSET" TRAILING LANTANA 1 GALLON FULL, HEALTHY, GOOD COLOR, 6" HT X 9" WD STREET TREE - SEE STREET TREE LEGEND 24" BOX STANDARD, 10' HT. X 4' HEAD -2" CALIPERAS SHOWN N O R T HScale: 1"=10'L-11 drawn: checked: scale: date: DSN 7.6.18PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANESP / BLLA QUINTABEAZER HOMES1800 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, SUITE 140BREA, CA 92821 (714) 672-7003David ASSOCIATES Inc.EAULT www.dnassociates.com 951 296 3430 sheet SIGNATURE RENEWAL DATE DATE 06-30-2018 S TATEOF CA L I F O RNIALICENSEDLA ND SCAPE AR C H I T ECTDavidS.N eault N o. 2 88441877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 140 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 CONCEPTUAL FRONT YARDSIRRIGATION NOTES 1. DESIGNS WILL COMPLY WITH CITY OF LA QUINTA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT'S LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN ORDINANCE 2. ALL TURF WITHIN 2' OF HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUB-SURFACE DRIP. ALL TURF 2' OR GREATER FROM HARDSCAPE SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH ROTOR/SPRAY. ALL LANDSCAPE TO BE IRRIGATED WITH DRIP. 3. ET BASED CONTROLLERS WILL BE USED ON SITE 0 10' 20' 40' PLAN 1 - TYPICAL PLAN 2 - CORNER LOT PLAN 3 - TYPICAL STREET SCENE I .dcs WATERmARK SPO Mc T ^ - A LA QUINtA , T. $FANIS}i REVIVAL H4k[IFNPA xHts , rv,-r r 1— P�+k6F I J. A M -- FRONT ELEVATIONS F L O R E 5 T A Basseniw LaQd� LA gUlrrr A, CA PLAN 1 2,302 SQ. FT. 3 BEDROOMS / 2.5 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,302 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 463 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 133 SQ. FT. PORCH 38 SQ. FT. OPT. 2ND FLOOR 904 SQ. FT. TOTAL w/ OPT. 2ND FLOOR 3,206 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION 49'-0"73'-0"GARAGE 20 2 204X PDR. STAIR @ OPT. 2ND FLOOR FLOOR PLAN 1X ENTRY CHOICE KITCHEN A GREAT ROOM 30 0 17 0X MASTER BEDROOM 16 5 15 0X CHOICE MASTER BATH A CHOICE BEDROOM 3 / CHOICE STUDY 10 6 12 8X BEDROOM 2 / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 10 2 10 6X PANTRY OUTDOOR LIVING 15 8 8 6X PORCH BA. 2 LAU. STORAGE GOLF CART / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 13 6 9 8X 18 L.F.10'-0"17'-0"5'-0"6'-0"20'-0"6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' TANKLESS W/H OPT. 12080 SL. GLS. DR.15'-0"OPT. WALK-IN- SHOWEROPT. CABINETSOPT. 10080 SL. GLS. DR. OPT. EXTENDED OUT DOOR LIVING LINEN OPT. 12080 STACKING DR. OPT. DR. L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 8 . 0 7 . 1 8 J:\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR1A.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 1 R E F L E C T S L A Q U I N T A E L E V A T I O N A1-2 3/$1 64)7 7$5*(764)7 %('52206%$7+6 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 )/225$5($7$%/( 67)/225 64)7 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 64)7 287'225/,9,1*64)7 325&+64)7 :2371')/225 64)7 127(648$5()227$*(0$<9$5<'8(720(7+2'2)&$/&8/$7,21   *$5$*( ; '2 3'5 67$,5# 2371' )/225 (175< ',1,1* 237/,9,1* ; .,7&+(1 *5($7 5220 ; 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+ %('5220 237'(1 2370$67(5%$ ; %('5220 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ; 3$175<     287'225 /,9,1* ; 325&+ %$ /$8 6725$*( *2/)&$57 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ;2376/'5237'%/)5'5/) /)237'%/)5'5122. ;        7$1./(66:+ 237)2/',1*'5 /,1(1 9$1,7< 237 :$/.,1 6+2:(5 $& 2376(&21')/225 23(172 %(/2: 23(172 %(/2: %$ /,1(1 %21865220237 %('5220:%$ ;'15%('5220 ; /$48,17$&$ :$7(50$5.6)'  6&$/(   6&$/(   6&$/(     ??'521(?-B'5,9(?*5283??)/5$':* 6+((712 3/$1 ; 5()/(&76/$48,17$(/(9$7,21 $2 AREAS OF CHANGE PLAN 1 &1X PDR. BEDROOM 2 10 6 12 8X 10 2 10 6X BA. 3 BA. 2OPT. DR.UNDER COUNTER REF. MICRO ABV. OPT. SINKKITCHENETTE OPT. CASITA IN LIEU OF BEDROOM 3 & GOLF CART ±149 SQ. FT. CASITA 14 0 13 8X MASTER BATH CHOICE B CHOICE MASTER BATH B HIGHWDW.HIGHWDW.HIGHWDW.HIGHWDW.PDR. BEDROOM 3 10 6 12 8X BA. 2 OPT. MASTER BEDROOM 2 IN LIEU OF BEDROOM 3 & GOLF CART MASTER BEDROOM 2 14 0 13 8X MASTER BATH 2 ±149 SQ. FT. STUDY CHOICE B IN LIEU OF BEDROOM 2 STUDY 10 9 12 8X BA. 2 CHOICE KITCHEN B PANTRY PDR. KITCHEN CHOICE B IN LIEU OF KITCHEN D.O. L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 8 . 0 7 . 1 8 \\DRONE\J_DRIVE\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR1A.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 1 ( O P T I O N S ) R E F L E C T S L A Q U I N T A E L E V A T I O N A1-3 237%(':%$ ,1/,(82)%21865220 6(&21')/225 '15%('5220 ; %$ 237/,9,1*5220 ,1/,(82)',1,1* /,9,1* ;237'%/)5'5237'(1 ,1/,(82)%('5220 '(1 ;   %$ 237 :$/.,16+2:(5 3'5 %('5220 ; %('5220 ; %$%$237'581'(5 &2817(55() 0,&52$%92376,1. .,7&+(1(77( 237&$6,7$ ,1/,(82)%('5220 *2/)&$57 “64)7 &$6,7$ ; 3'5 2370$67(5%('5220 ,1/,(82)%('%('*2/)&$57 /) 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+/,1(1/,1(1 “64)7 237:$/.,16+2:(5 2375$,1 6+2:(5 0$67(5 %$7+  2376/'5237'%/)5'5/,1(1 9$1,7< 3'5 %('5220 ; %$ 2370$67(5%('5220 ,1/,(82)%('5220 *2/)&$57 “64)7 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+ /$48,17$&$ :$7(50$5.6)'  6&$/(   6&$/(   6&$/(     ??'521(?-B'5,9(?*5283??)/5$':* 6+((712 3/$1 ; 237,216 5()/(&76/$48,17$(/(9$7,21 $3 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1 & 1X JIFT Kaar PON A i 4. t. e., ,..,r LA QUFN rA F L O R E 5 T A rrrrd� C�gpr: pp_ Z7r4#41r �' qw QIJIHT A. CA :A�Sm Wamcs A1-4 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1 & 1X GARAGE 20 2 20 4X PDR. STAIR @ OPT. 2ND FLOOR FLOOR PLAN 1X ENTRY CHOICE KITCHEN A GREAT ROOM 30 0 17 0X MASTER BEDROOM 16 5 15 0X CHOICE MASTER BATH A CHOICE BEDROOM 3 / CHOICE STUDY 10 6 12 8X BEDROOM 2 / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 10 2 10 6X PANTRY OUTDOOR LIVING 15 8 8 6X PORCH BA. 2 LAU. STORAGE GOLF CART / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 13 6 9 8X 18 L.F. TANKLESS W/H OPT. 12080 SL. GLS. DR. OPT. WALK-IN- SHOWEROPT. CABINETSOPT. 10080 SL. GLS. DR. OPT. EXTENDED OUT DOOR LIVING LINEN OPT. 12080 STACKING DR. OPT. DR. 49'-0"73'-0"10'-0"17'-0"5'-0"6'-0"20'-0"6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' 15'-0"PLAN 1 2,302 SQ. FT. 3 BEDROOMS / 2.5 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,302 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 463 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 133 SQ. FT. PORCH 38 SQ. FT. OPT. 2ND FLOOR 904 SQ. FT. TOTAL w/ OPT. 2ND FLOOR 3,206 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 8 . 0 7 . 1 8 J:\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR1B.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 1 R E F L E C T S S P A N I S H R E V I V A L E L E V A T I O N A1-5 *$5$*( ; '2 3'5 67$,5# 2371' )/225 (175< ',1,1* 237/,9,1* ; .,7&+(1 *5($7 5220 ; 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+ %('5220 237'(1 2370$67(5%$ ; %('5220 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ; 3$175< 287'225 /,9,1* ; 325&+ %$ /$8 6725$*( *2/)&$57 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ;2376/'5237'%/)5'5/) /)237'%/)5'5122. ; 7$1./(66:+ 237)2/',1*'5 /,1(1 9$1,7< 237 :$/.,1 6+2:(5 $&              23(172 %(/2: 23(172 %(/2: %$ /,1(1 %21865220237 %('5220:%$ ;'15%('5220 ; 2376(&21')/225 3/$1 64)7 7$5*(764)7 %('52206%$7+6 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 )/225$5($7$%/( 67)/225 64)7 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 64)7 287'225/,9,1*64)7 325&+64)7 :2371')/225 64)7 127(648$5()227$*(0$<9$5<'8(720(7+2'2)&$/&8/$7,21 /$48,17$&$ :$7(50$5.6)'  6&$/(   6&$/(   6&$/(     ??'521(?-B'5,9(?*5283??)/5%':* 6+((712 3/$1 ; 5()/(&7663$1,6+5(9,9$/(/(9$7,21 $5 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1 & 1X A1-6 A1-6 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1 & 1X GARAGE 20 2 20 4X PDR. STAIR @ OPT. 2ND FLOOR FLOOR PLAN 1X ENTRY CHOICE KITCHEN A GREAT ROOM 30 0 17 0X MASTER BEDROOM 16 5 15 0X CHOICE MASTER BATH A CHOICE BEDROOM 3 / CHOICE STUDY 10 6 12 8X BEDROOM 2 / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 10 6X PANTRY OUTDOOR LIVING 15 8 8 6X PORCH BA. 2 LAU. STORAGE GOLF CART / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 13 6 9 8X 18 L.F. TANKLESS W/H OPT. 12080 SL. GLS. DR. OPT. WALK-IN- SHOWEROPT. CABINETSOPT. 10080 SL. GLS. DR. OPT. EXTENDED OUT DOOR LIVING LINEN OPT. 12080 STACKING DR. OPT. DR. 49'-0"73'-0"10'-0"17'-0"17'-0"5'-0"6'-0"20'-0"6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' 15'-0"4'-0" PLAN 1 2,302 SQ. FT. 3 BEDROOMS / 2.5 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,302 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 463 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 133 SQ. FT. PORCH 38 SQ. FT. OPT. 2ND FLOOR 904 SQ. FT. TOTAL w/ OPT. 2ND FLOOR 3,206 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 8 . 0 7 . 1 8 J:\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR1C.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 1 R E F L E C T S H A C I E N D A E L E V A T I O N A1-7 *$5$*( ; '2 3'5 67$,5# 2371' )/225 (175< ',1,1* 237/,9,1* ; .,7&+(1 *5($7 5220 ; 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+ %('5220 237'(1 2370$67(5%$ ; %('5220 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ; 3$175< 287'225 /,9,1* ; 325&+ %$ /$8 6725$*( *2/)&$57 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ;2376/'5237'%/)5'5/) /)237'%/)5'5122. ; 7$1./(66:+ 237)2/',1*'5 /,1(1 9$1,7< 237 :$/.,1 6+2:(5 $&              23(172 %(/2: 23(172 %(/2: %$ /,1(1 %21865220237 %('5220:%$ ;'15%('5220 ; 2376(&21')/225 3/$1 64)7 7$5*(764)7 %('52206%$7+6 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 )/225$5($7$%/( 67)/225 64)7 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 64)7 287'225/,9,1*64)7 325&+64)7 :2371')/225 64)7 127(648$5()227$*(0$<9$5<'8(720(7+2'2)&$/&8/$7,21 /$48,17$&$ :$7(50$5.6)'  6&$/(   6&$/(   6&$/(     ??'521(?-B'5,9(?*5283??)/5&':* 6+((712 3/$1 ; 5()/(&76+$&,(1'$(/(9$7,21 $7 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1 & 1X A1-8 A1-8 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1&1X A1-9 PLAN 1 2,302 SQ. FT. 3 BEDROOMS / 2.5 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,302 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 463 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 133 SQ. FT. PORCH 38 SQ. FT. OPT. 2ND FLOOR 904 SQ. FT. TOTAL w/ OPT. 2ND FLOOR 3,206 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION 49'-0"73'-0"GARAGE 20 2 20 4X PDR. STAIR @ OPT. 2ND FLOOR FLOOR PLAN 1X ENTRY CHOICE KITCHEN A GREAT ROOM 30 0 17 0X MASTER BEDROOM 16 5 15 0X CHOICE MASTER BATH A CHOICE BEDROOM 3 / CHOICE STUDY 10 6 12 8X BEDROOM 2 / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 10 2 106X PANTRY OUTDOOR LIVING 15 8 8 6X PORCH BA. 2 LAU. STORAGE GOLF CART / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 13 6 9 8X 18 L.F.10'-0"17'-0"5'-0"6'-0"20'-0"6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' TANKLESS W/H OPT. 12080 SL. GLS. DR.15'-0"OPT. WALK-IN- SHOWEROPT. CABINETSOPT. 10080 SL. GLS. DR. OPT. EXTENDED OUT DOOR LIVING LINEN OPT. 12080 STACKING DR. OPT. DR. OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW BA. 3 LINEN BONUS ROOM / OPT. BEDROOM 5 W/ BA. 4 27 0 15 0X DN17 R BEDROOM 4 114 15 4X L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 8 . 0 7 . 1 8 J:\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR1A.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 1X R E F L E C T S L A Q U I N T A E L E V A T I O N A1-10 3/$1 64)7 7$5*(764)7 %('52206%$7+6 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 )/225$5($7$%/( 67)/225 64)7 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 64)7 287'225/,9,1*64)7 325&+64)7 :2371')/225 64)7 127(648$5()227$*(0$<9$5<'8(720(7+2'2)&$/&8/$7,21   *$5$*( ; '2 3'5 67$,5# 2371' )/225 (175< ',1,1* 237/,9,1* ; .,7&+(1 *5($7 5220 ; 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+ %('5220 237'(1 2370$67(5%$ ; %('5220 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ; 3$175<     287'225 /,9,1* ; 325&+ %$ /$8 6725$*( *2/)&$57 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ;2376/'5237'%/)5'5/) /)237'%/)5'5122. ;        7$1./(66:+ 237)2/',1*'5 /,1(1 9$1,7< 237 :$/.,1 6+2:(5 $& 2376(&21')/225 23(172 %(/2: 23(172 %(/2: %$ /,1(1 %21865220237 %('5220:%$ ;'15%('5220 ; /$48,17$&$ :$7(50$5.6)'  6&$/(   6&$/(   6&$/(     ??'521(?-B'5,9(?*5283??)/5$':* 6+((712 3/$1 ; 5()/(&76/$48,17$(/(9$7,21 $10 AREAS OF CHANGE PLAN 1 &1X PDR. BEDROOM 2 10 6 12 8X 10 2 10 6X BA. 3 BA. 2OPT. DR.UNDER COUNTER REF. MICRO ABV. OPT. SINKKITCHENETTE OPT. CASITA IN LIEU OF BEDROOM 3 & GOLF CART ±149 SQ. FT. CASITA 14 0 13 8X MASTER BATH CHOICE B CHOICE MASTER BATH B HIGHWDW.HIGHWDW.HIGHWDW.HIGHWDW.PDR. BEDROOM 3 10 6 12 8X BA. 2 OPT. MASTER BEDROOM 2 IN LIEU OF BEDROOM 3 & GOLF CART MASTER BEDROOM 2 14 0 13 8X MASTER BATH 2 ±149 SQ. FT. STUDY CHOICE B IN LIEU OF BEDROOM 2 STUDY 10 9 12 8X BA. 2 CHOICE KITCHEN B PANTRY PDR. KITCHEN CHOICE B IN LIEU OF KITCHEN D.O. L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 8 . 0 7 . 1 8 \\DRONE\J_DRIVE\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR1A.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 1X ( O P T I O N S ) R E F L E C T S L A Q U I N T A E L E V A T I O N A1-11 237%(':%$ ,1/,(82)%21865220 6(&21')/225 '15%('5220 ; %$ 237/,9,1*5220 ,1/,(82)',1,1* /,9,1* ;237'%/)5'5237'(1 ,1/,(82)%('5220 '(1 ;   %$ 237 :$/.,16+2:(5 3'5 %('5220 ; %('5220 ; %$%$237'581'(5 &2817(55() 0,&52$%92376,1. .,7&+(1(77( 237&$6,7$ ,1/,(82)%('5220 *2/)&$57 “64)7 &$6,7$ ; 3'5 2370$67(5%('5220 ,1/,(82)%('%('*2/)&$57 /) 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+/,1(1/,1(1 “64)7 237:$/.,16+2:(5 2375$,1 6+2:(5 0$67(5 %$7+  2376/'5237'%/)5'5/,1(1 9$1,7< 3'5 %('5220 ; %$ 2370$67(5%('5220 ,1/,(82)%('5220 *2/)&$57 “64)7 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+ /$48,17$&$ :$7(50$5.6)'  6&$/(   6&$/(   6&$/(     ??'521(?-B'5,9(?*5283??)/5$':* 6+((712 3/$1 ; 237,216 5()/(&76/$48,17$(/(9$7,21 $11 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1 & 1X A1-12 A1-12 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1 & 1X GARAGE 20 2 20 4X PDR. STAIR @ OPT. 2ND FLOOR FLOOR PLAN 1X ENTRY CHOICE KITCHEN A GREAT ROOM 30 0 17 0X MASTER BEDROOM 16 5 15 0X CHOICE MASTER BATH A CHOICE BEDROOM 3 / CHOICE STUDY 10 6 12 8X BEDROOM 2 / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 10 2 10 6X PANTRY OUTDOOR LIVING 15 8 8 6X PORCH BA. 2 LAU. STORAGE GOLF CART / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 13 6 9 8X 18 L.F. TANKLESS W/H OPT. 12080 SL. GLS. DR. OPT. WALK-IN- SHOWEROPT. CABINETSOPT. 10080 SL. GLS. DR. OPT. EXTENDED OUT DOOR LIVING LINEN OPT. 12080 STACKING DR. OPT. DR. 49'-0"73'-0"10'-0"17'-0"5'-0"6'-0"20'-0"6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' 15'-0"OPEN TO BELOW BA. 3 LINEN BONUS ROOM / OPT. BEDROOM 5 W/ BA. 4 27 0 15 0X DN17 R BEDROOM 4 114 15 4X PLAN 1 2,302 SQ. FT. 3 BEDROOMS / 2.5 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,302 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 463 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 133 SQ. FT. PORCH 38 SQ. FT. OPT. 2ND FLOOR 904 SQ. FT. TOTAL w/ OPT. 2ND FLOOR 3,206 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 8 . 0 7 . 1 8 J:\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR1B.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 1X R E F L E C T S S P A N I S H R E V I V A L E L E V A T I O N A1-13 *$5$*( ; '2 3'5 67$,5# 2371' )/225 (175< ',1,1* 237/,9,1* ; .,7&+(1 *5($7 5220 ; 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+ %('5220 237'(1 2370$67(5%$ ; %('5220 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ; 3$175< 287'225 /,9,1* ; 325&+ %$ /$8 6725$*( *2/)&$57 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ;2376/'5237'%/)5'5/) /)237'%/)5'5122. ; 7$1./(66:+ 237)2/',1*'5 /,1(1 9$1,7< 237 :$/.,1 6+2:(5 $&              23(172 %(/2: 23(172 %(/2: %$ /,1(1 %21865220237 %('5220:%$ ;'15%('5220 ; 2376(&21')/225 3/$1 64)7 7$5*(764)7 %('52206%$7+6 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 )/225$5($7$%/( 67)/225 64)7 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 64)7 287'225/,9,1*64)7 325&+64)7 :2371')/225 64)7 127(648$5()227$*(0$<9$5<'8(720(7+2'2)&$/&8/$7,21 /$48,17$&$ :$7(50$5.6)'  6&$/(   6&$/(   6&$/(     ??'521(?-B'5,9(?*5283??)/5%':* 6+((712 3/$1 ; 5()/(&7663$1,6+5(9,9$/(/(9$7,21 $13 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1 & 1X A1-14 A1-14 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1 & 1X GARAGE 20 2 20 4X PDR. STAIR @ OPT. 2ND FLOOR FLOOR PLAN 1X ENTRY CHOICE KITCHEN A GREAT ROOM 30 0 17 0X MASTER BEDROOM 16 5 15 0X CHOICE MASTER BATH A CHOICE BEDROOM 3 / CHOICE STUDY 10 6 12 8X BEDROOM 2 / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 10 6X PANTRY OUTDOOR LIVING 15 8 8 6X PORCH BA. 2 LAU. STORAGE GOLF CART / OPT. CASITA / OPT. MASTER BED. 2 13 6 9 8X 18 L.F. TANKLESS W/H OPT. 12080 SL. GLS. DR. OPT. WALK-IN- SHOWEROPT. CABINETSOPT. 10080 SL. GLS. DR. OPT. EXTENDED OUT DOOR LIVING LINEN OPT. 12080 STACKING DR. OPT. DR. 49'-0"73'-0"10'-0"17'-0"17'-0"5'-0"6'-0"20'-0"6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' 15'-0"4'-0" OPEN TO BELOW BA. 3 LINEN BONUS ROOM / OPT. BEDROOM 5 W/ BA. 4 27 0 15 0X DN17 R BEDROOM 4 114 15 4X PLAN 1 2,302 SQ. FT. 3 BEDROOMS / 2.5 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,302 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 463 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 133 SQ. FT. PORCH 38 SQ. FT. OPT. 2ND FLOOR 904 SQ. FT. TOTAL w/ OPT. 2ND FLOOR 3,206 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 8 . 0 7 . 1 8 J:\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR1C.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 1X R E F L E C T S H A C I E N D A E L E V A T I O N A1-15 *$5$*( ; '2 3'5 67$,5# 2371' )/225 (175< ',1,1* 237/,9,1* ; .,7&+(1 *5($7 5220 ; 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+ %('5220 237'(1 2370$67(5%$ ; %('5220 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ; 3$175< 287'225 /,9,1* ; 325&+ %$ /$8 6725$*( *2/)&$57 237&$6,7$ 2370$67(5%(' ;2376/'5237'%/)5'5/) /)237'%/)5'5122. ; 7$1./(66:+ 237)2/',1*'5 /,1(1 9$1,7< 237 :$/.,1 6+2:(5 $&              23(172 %(/2: 23(172 %(/2: %$ /,1(1 %21865220237 %('5220:%$ ;'15%('5220 ; 2376(&21')/225 3/$1 64)7 7$5*(764)7 %('52206%$7+6 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 )/225$5($7$%/( 67)/225 64)7 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 64)7 287'225/,9,1*64)7 325&+64)7 :2371')/225 64)7 127(648$5()227$*(0$<9$5<'8(720(7+2'2)&$/&8/$7,21 /$48,17$&$ :$7(50$5.6)'  6&$/(   6&$/(   6&$/(     ??'521(?-B'5,9(?*5283??)/5&':* 6+((712 3/$1 ; 5()/(&76+$&,(1'$(/(9$7,21 $5 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1 & 1X A1-16 A1-16 AREAS OF CHANGE PLANS 1 & 1X 4a QwNtA 5PANI514 REVIVA4 FIACIFNPA - — FRONT ELEvAliDNI F L O R E 5 T A 9assrnian Lay p 4w 1}ylrrrA, CA Kornas 20'-0"65'-0"GARAGE 20 2 20 4X BEDROOM 4 / OPT. MASTER BEDROOM CHOICE 2 11 0 108X CHOICE BEDROOM 2 / CHOICE STUDY 10 2 11 4X MASTER BEDROOM 17 6 15 0X GREAT ROOM 17 0 16 0X DINING 15 2 10 6X ENTRY COURTYARD ENTRY NOOK 14 4 12 6X BA. 2 MASTER BATH CHOICE 'A' CHOICE KITCHEN 'A' BEDROOM 3 / OPT. MASTER BATH CHOICE 2 11 0 11 5X TANKLESS W/H LAU. BA. 3 GOLF CART 80 6 6X OUTDOOR LIVING 16 8 10 0X 25 L.F. PDR. 49'-0"15'-0"13'-0"6'-0"5'-0"12'-0"6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' OPT. 12080 STACKING DR. DROP BREEZEWAY STORAGE OPT. WALK-IN- SHOWER LINEN OPT. DR. PLAN 2 2,467 SQ. FT. 4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,467 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 513 SQ. FT. ENTRY COURTYARD 110 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 165 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION CHOICE MASTER BATH 'B' OPT. RAIN SHOWER MASTER BATH CHOICE 'B' CHOICE KITCHEN 'B' NOOK 14 4 10 4X KITCHEN A/C OPTIONAL MASTER BEDROOM 2 IN LIEU OF BA.3 & BEDROOM 3 & 4 MASTER BEDROOM 2 13 4 15 0X MASTER BATH CHOICE 2 WALK-IN CLOSET13 L.F. BA. 2 PDR. BEDROOM 2 10 0 11 4X LINENOPT. SINK CHOICE STUDY IN LIEU OF BEDROOM 2 CHOICE STUDY 12 4 11 4X L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 3 . 2 6 . 1 8 \\DRONE\J_DRIVE\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR2A.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 2 R E F L E C T S L A Q U I N T A E L E V A T I O N A2-2 OPP-4 m m Lw- C�m P LAN 2 W-j-! FA L.O. qU?NTA F L O RIE STA LA GkPPFkrTA, CA r PLAN 2 2,467 SQ. FT. 4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,467 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 513 SQ. FT. ENTRY COURTYARD 110 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 165 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION GARAGE 20 2 20 4X BEDROOM 4 / OPT. MASTER BEDROOM CHOICE 2 11 0 108X CHOICE BEDROOM 2 / CHOICE STUDY 10 2 11 4X MASTER BEDROOM 17 6 15 0X GREAT ROOM 17 0 16 0X DINING 152 10 6X ENTRY NOOK 14 4 12 6X BA. 2 MASTER BATH CHOICE 'A' CHOICE KITCHEN 'A' BEDROOM 3 / OPT. MASTER BATH CHOICE 2 11 0 11 5X TANKLESS W/H LAU. BA. 3 GOLF CART 8 0 6 6X OUTDOOR LIVING 16 8 10 0X 25 L.F. PDR. OPT. 12080 STACKING DR. DROP STORAGE OPT. WALK-IN- SHOWER LINEN OPT. DR. 6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' 12'-0"20'-0"65'-0"50'-0"15'-0"13'-0"5'-0"5'-0" ENTRY COURTYARD L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 3 . 2 6 . 1 8 \\DRONE\J_DRIVE\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR2B.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 2 R E F L E C T S S P A N I S H R E V I V A L E L E V A T I O N A2-4 MEAN ;FFT I FRONT 0 RPQF PLAN IL =W -- C3 —, —� 3� PK4fr PCAN 2 A 2- 1 4, SPAMS Fp A Evi YAL FLORIESTA LA QLJNVA, CA 0. Kornas PLAN 2 2,467 SQ. FT. 4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,467 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 513 SQ. FT. ENTRY COURTYARD 110 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 165 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION GARAGE 20 2 20 4X BEDROOM 4 / OPT. MASTER BEDROOM CHOICE 2 11 0 108X CHOICE BEDROOM 2 / CHOICE STUDY 10 2 11 4X MASTER BEDROOM 17 6 15 0X GREAT ROOM 17 0 16 0X DINING 152 10 6X ENTRY NOOK 14 4 12 6X BA. 2 MASTER BATH CHOICE 'A' CHOICE KITCHEN 'A' BEDROOM 3 / OPT. MASTER BATH CHOICE 2 11 0 11 5X TANKLESS W/H LAU. BA. 3 GOLF CART 8 0 6 6X OUTDOOR LIVING 16 8 10 0X 25 L.F. PDR. OPT. 12080 STACKING DR. DROP STORAGE OPT.WALK-IN- SHOWER LINEN OPT. DR.20'-0"65'-0"50'-0"15'-0"13'-0"5'-0"5'-0"12'-0"6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' BREEZEWAY L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 3 . 2 6 . 1 8 \\DRONE\J_DRIVE\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR2C.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 2 R E F L E C T S H A C I E N D A E L E V A T I O N A2-6 LUT WAX F RAN C f tdl Yd - — MACIEP40A FLORE5TA B�nim LNM pp 4A ¢IJYNFA, CA.- k{QITjQS ]Ir �IrYI L+ quiNTA 51FAN1514 REVIVAL •. n.- -„r A FLAN a - — FRONT ELEVATIDNI FLORESTA p , � LA I}IJlrrr A, CA �" �4RFPS A3— 1 9a3srnian L3q a, 50'-0"63'-2"PANTRY D.O. +143 SQ. FT. 25 L.F. 9 L.F. OPT. DR.10'-0"17'-0"5'-0"5'-0"20'-0"6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' 21'-10"TANKLESS W/H DROP 4'-0"OPT. DR. LINEN COATSOPT. WALK-IN- SHOWER GARAGE 20 2 20 4X LAU. BA. 3 BA. 2 GOLF CART / OPT. CASITA 13 2 9 8X BEDROOM 3 / OPT. CASITA 11 4 10 6X BEDROOM 2 11 4 11 0X BEDROOM 4 / CHOICE OFFICE 11 8 11 0X PORCH ENTRY KITCHEN MASTER BEDROOM 16 4 16 0X MASTER BATH CHOICE 'A' DINING 11 6 14 2X GREAT ROOM 20 5 16 8X OUTDOOR LIVING 12 0 16 6X PDR. OPT. EXPANDED OUTDOOR LIVING OPT. 9080 STACKING DR.OPT. 9080 STACKING DR.OPT. 10080 SL. DR. PLAN 3 2,497 SQ. FT. 2,746 SQ. FT. W/ 146 SQ. FT. OPT. CASITA TARGET: 2,600 SQ. FT. 4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,497 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 429 SQ. FT. PORCH 80 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 201 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION CHOICE OFFICE IN LIEU OF BEDROOM 4HIGHWDW.CHOICE OFFICE 11 8 14 2X BA. 2 OPT. CASITA IN LIEU OF BEDROOM 3 & GOLF CART +143 SQ. FT. UNDER COUNTER REF. MICRO ABV. OPT. SINK KITCHENETTELINENPORCH ENTRY CASITA 11 4 210X BA. 3 ENTRY GREAT ROOM 20 5 16 8X OUTDOOR LIVING 12 0 16 6X OPT. EXPANDED OUTDOOR LIVING OPT. EXPANDED OUTDOOR LIVING AT GREAT ROOM CHOICE KITCHEN 'B' AT KITCHEN KITCHEN 32 L.F.OPT. DR. TANKLESS W/H LINEN LAU. OPT. RAIN SHOWER BENCHCHOICE MASTER BATH 'B' MASTER BATH CHOICE 'B' L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 3 . 2 6 . 1 8 \\DRONE\J_DRIVE\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR3A.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 3 R E F L E C T S L A Q U I N T A E L E V A T I O N A3-2   *$5$*( ; /$8 %$ %$ *2/)&$57 237&$6,7$ ; %('5220 237&$6,7$ ; %('5220 ; %('5220237 2)),&('(1 ; 325&+ (175< .,7&+(1 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+ 3$175< '2 64)7 ',1,1* ; *5($7 5220 ; 287'225 /,9,1* ; /) /) 3'5 237'5        7$1./(66:+ '523 237(;3$1'(' 287'225/,9,1* 237 '5 /,1(1 9$1,7</,1(1237 :$/.,1 6+2:(5 $& 3/$1 64)7 64)7:64)7237&$6,7$ 7$5*(764)7 %('52206%$7+6 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 )/225$5($7$%/( 67)/225 64)7 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 64)7 325&+64)7 287'225/,9,1*64)7 127(648$5()227$*(0$<9$5<'8(720(7+2'2)&$/&8/$7,21 2)),&('(1 ; 2372)),&('(1 %$68,7( ,1/,(82)%('5220 %$+,*+:':237&$6,7$ ,1/,(82)%('5220 *2/)&$57 64)7 325&+ (175< &$6,7$ ; 81'(5 &2817(5 5() 0,&52$%9 2376,1..,7&+(1(77(%$ (175</,1(10$67(5 %$7+ 237'5 /,1(1 9$1,7< 237:$/.,16+2:(5 2375$,16+2:(5 /$48,17$&$ :$7(50$5.6)'  6&$/(   6&$/(   6&$/(     ??'521(?-B'5,9(?*5283??)/5$':* 6+((712 3/$1 5()/(&76/$48,17$(/(9$7,21 $ AREAS OF CHANGE PLAN 3 PDA FRONT --� A LEFT Pow PLU4 A T r4AN a fY'I YC I I AM - — Ar �gU?NtA _. F L O R E 5 T A emmnhr LA" p Q � 4A gyFnrrA, CA r-.W- _ PLAN 3 2,497 SQ. FT. 2,746 SQ. FT. W/ 146 SQ. FT. OPT. CASITA TARGET: 2,600 SQ. FT. 4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,497 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 429 SQ. FT. PORCH 80 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 201 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION PANTRY D.O. +143 SQ. FT. 25 L.F. 9 L.F. OPT. DR. TANKLESS W/H DROP OPT. DR. LINEN COATSOPT. WALK-IN- SHOWER GARAGE 20 2 20 4X LAU. BA. 3 BA. 2 GOLF CART / OPT. CASITA 13 2 9 8X BEDROOM 3 / OPT. CASITA 11 4 10 6X BEDROOM 2 11 4 110X BEDROOM 4 / CHOICE OFFICE 11 8 11 0X PORCH ENTRY KITCHEN MASTER BEDROOM 16 4 16 0X MASTER BATH CHOICE 'A' DINING 11 6 14 2X GREAT ROOM 20 5 16 8X OUTDOOR LIVING 12 0 16 6X PDR. OPT. EXPANDED OUTDOOR LIVING OPT. 9080 STACKING DR.OPT. 9080 STACKING DR.OPT. 10080 SL. DR. 6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' 50'-0"63'-2"10'-0"17'-0"5'-0"5'-0"20'-0"21'-10"4'-0"L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 3 . 2 6 . 1 8 \\DRONE\J_DRIVE\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR3B.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 3 R E F L E C T S S P A N I S H R E V I V A L E L E V A T I O N A3-4 3/$1 64)7 64)7:64)7237&$6,7$ 7$5*(764)7 %('52206%$7+6 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 )/225$5($7$%/( 67)/225 64)7 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 64)7 325&+64)7 287'225/,9,1*64)7 127(648$5()227$*(0$<9$5<'8(720(7+2'2)&$/&8/$7,21 *$5$*( ; /$8 %$ %$ *2/)&$57 237&$6,7$ ; %('5220 237&$6,7$ ; %('5220 ; %('5220237 2)),&('(1 ; 325&+ (175< .,7&+(1 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+ 3$175< '2 64)7 ',1,1* ; *5($7 5220 ; 287'225 /,9,1* ; /) /) 3'5 237'5 7$1./(66:+ '523 237(;3$1'(' 287'225/,9,1*237 '5 /,1(1 9$1,7</,1(1237 :$/.,1 6+2:(5 $&            /$48,17$&$ :$7(50$5.6)'  6&$/(   6&$/(   6&$/(     ??'521(?-B'5,9(?*5283??)/5%':* 6+((712 3/$1 5()/(&7663$1,6+5(9,9$/(/(9$7,21 $ AREAS OF CHANGE PLAN 3 JIE" LUT ROOf PLkN a, SPANIS4 It pp ah -p FLORESTA Bma*nkm LA" pp LA IjkPPFkrTA, CA r -. W- PLAN 3 2,497 SQ. FT. 2,746 SQ. FT. W/ 146 SQ. FT. OPT. CASITA TARGET: 2,600 SQ. FT. 4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART FLOOR AREA TABLE 1ST FLOOR 2,497 SQ. FT. 2 - CAR GARAGE W/ GOLF CART 429 SQ. FT. PORCH 80 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR LIVING 201 SQ. FT. NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION PANTRY D.O. +143 SQ. FT. 25 L.F. 9 L.F. OPT. DR. TANKLESS W/H DROP OPT. DR. LINEN COATSOPT. WALK-IN- SHOWER GARAGE 20 2 20 4X LAU. BA. 3 BA. 2 GOLF CART / OPT. CASITA 13 2 9 8X BEDROOM 3 / OPT. CASITA 11 4 10 6X BEDROOM 2 11 4 110X BEDROOM 4 / CHOICE OFFICE 11 8 11 0X PORCH ENTRY KITCHEN MASTER BEDROOM 16 4 16 0X MASTER BATH CHOICE 'A' DINING 11 6 14 2X GREAT ROOM 20 5 16 8X OUTDOOR LIVING 12 0 16 6X PDR. OPT. EXPANDED OUTDOOR LIVING OPT. 9080 STACKING DR.OPT. 9080 STACKING DR.OPT. 10080 SL. DR. 50'-0"63'-2"10'-0"17'-0"5'-0"5'-0"20'-0"6 0 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' 21'-10"4'-0"L A Q U I N T A , C A F L O R E S T A 0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"0 24 8SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 9 8 . 1 3 1 2 7 0 3 . 2 6 . 1 8 \\DRONE\J_DRIVE\GROUP1\29813127\3127 FLR3C.DWG SHEET NO. P L A N 3 R E F L E C T S H A C I E N D A E L E V A T I O N A3-6 3/$1 64)7 64)7:64)7237&$6,7$ 7$5*(764)7 %('52206%$7+6 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 )/225$5($7$%/( 67)/225 64)7 &$5*$5$*(:*2/)&$57 64)7 325&+64)7 287'225/,9,1*64)7 127(648$5()227$*(0$<9$5<'8(720(7+2'2)&$/&8/$7,21 *$5$*( ; /$8 %$ %$ *2/)&$57 237&$6,7$ ; %('5220 237&$6,7$ ; %('5220 ; %('5220237 2)),&('(1 ; 325&+ (175< .,7&+(1 0$67(5 %('5220 ; 0$67(5 %$7+ 3$175< '2 64)7 ',1,1* ; *5($7 5220 ; 287'225 /,9,1* ; /) /) 3'5 237'5 7$1./(66:+ '523 237(;3$1'(' 287'225/,9,1*237 '5 /,1(1 9$1,7</,1(1237 :$/.,1 6+2:(5 $&            /$48,17$&$ :$7(50$5.6)'  6&$/(   6&$/(   6&$/(     ??'521(?-B'5,9(?*5283??)/5&':* 6+((712 3/$1 5()/(&76+$&,(1'$(/(9$7,21 $ AREAS OF CHANGE PLAN 3 nu Rf. R ,EF FRONT c MGFiT PIALK T-4-t-, ACuIRMA F L O R E S T A LA 4L14NTA, CA F=m Kornas mop! STREET PERSPECTIVES -0 3Y -p WATERMARK S F D LA QUONTA. CA monv STREET PERSPECTIVES ,F,F„ WATERMARK S F DLA QUPNTA. CA Beazer eran:r: tgri ., Beazer : n .i" STREET PERSPECTIVES WATERMARK SFD LA 4UPNTA, CA it ,! emrinW �igpi iii .i. Mi p dop fiAtmimm b4M POOL BUILDING (1,612 SaFr. ) WATERMARK I.-d A—T F t 4 „a. .1 WWI w P-I -1 ar iEF-. g rp '�sspr. POOL B U l L p I N'i it WATERMARK 1=ci_a— 1 Jil �+�FJ mow PLAN # PM MONT A WATERMARK JOB# 298-13127 COLOR SELECTION CHART ROOF: ($*/(WROUGHT IRON: 6:&$9,$5ENTRY DOOR STAIN:7+(50$758'2256 129(0%(5 PAINT: 6+(5:,1:,//,$06BRICK: %(/'(1&86+:$2/'9,5*,1,$52&.<5,'*(6,28;&,7<(/'25$'2$'2%( 129(0%(5 $''('6&+(0(6  STUCCO:20(*$BRICK MORTAR:25&20$&3/86CLAY OUTLOOKERS: 6:-87(%52:15(9,6('-$18$5< $'2%(%5,&. 6721($''('  CERAMIC TILE:$572%5,&.ZZZDUWREULFNFRPSTONE:&5($7,9(0,1(65(9,6(')(%58$5< %5,&. $'2%(%5,&,167$//$7,216.  *REVISED MARCH 3, 2015(ADDED PAINTED BRICKS) SCHEMES 1-6 ARE FOR ALL HACIENDA, LA QUINTA & SPANISH REVIVAL ELEVATIONS SCHEME 1 2 3 4 5 6 TAILS, EAVES, BEAMS, KICKERS, SILL & GARAGE DOOR  +20(67($'  6785'<%52:1  :($7+(5('6+,1*/(  :(//%5('%52:1  3527e*e%521=(  .$)(( PRECAST EMULATE TRIM  6$1'  :,1'625*5(,*(  .+$.,6+$'(  120$',&'(6(57  %$6.(7%(,*(  287(5%$1.6 SHUTTERS  35,9,/(*(*5((1  &$3(9(5'(  58**('%52:1  678',2%/8(*5((1  6(&5(7*$5'(1  $55(67,1*$8%581 ENTRY DOOR STAIN :$/187 &+(55< 0$+2*$1< :$/187 :$/187 0$+2*$1< BASE STUCCO õ    ö   $ CERAMIC TILES 6'D3$77(517,/( X62/,'7,/(  6'E3$77(517,/( F62/,'7,/(  6'E3$77(517,/( X62/,'7,/(  6'E3$77(517,/( X62/,'7,/(  6'D3$77(517,/( F62/,'7,/(  6'E3$77(517,/( 862/,'7,/(  TILE GROUT $17,48(:+,7( $17,48(:+,7( $17,48(:+,7( $17,48(:+,7( $17,48(:+,7( $17,48(:+,7( BRICK PAINTED 7526 MAISON BLANCHE 6106 KILM BEIGE 6120 BELIEVABLE BUFF 6141 SOFTER TAN 6120 BELIEVABLE BUFF 7538 TAMARIND EL DORADO CAPISTRANO ADOBE BRICK WITH MORTAR 62/$12$'2%(%5,&. )/86+),1,6+ 0$&3/860$/,%8*2/' 62/$12$'2%(%5,&. )/86+),1,6+ 0$&3/860$/,%8*2/' 62/$12$'2%(%5,&. )/86+),1,6+ 0$&3/860$/,%8*2/' 62/$12$'2%(%5,&. )/86+),1,6+ 0$&3/860$/,%8*2/' 62/$12$'2%(%5,&. )/86+),1,6+ 0$&3/860$/,%8*2/' 62/$12$'2%(%5,&. )/86+),1,6+ 0$&3/860$/,%8*2/' ‘S’ ROOF    6&&    WATERMARK JOB# 298-13127 COLOR SELECTION CHART ROOF: ($*/(WROUGHT IRON: 6:&$9,$5ENTRY DOOR STAIN:7+(50$758'2256 129(0%(5 PAINT: 6+(5:,1:,//,$06BRICK: %(/'(1&86+:$2/'9,5*,1,$52&.<5,'*(6,28;&,7<(/'25$'2$'2%( 129(0%(5 $''('6&+(0(6  STUCCO:20(*$BRICK MORTAR:25&20$&3/86CLAY OUTLOOKERS: 6:-87(%52:15(9,6('-$18$5< $'2%(%5,&. 6721($''('  CERAMIC TILE:$572%5,&.ZZZDUWREULFNFRPSTONE:&5($7,9(0,1(65(9,6(')(%58$5< %5,&. $'2%(%5,&,167$//$7,216.  *REVISED MARCH 3, 2015(ADDED PAINTED BRICKS) SCHEMES 7-11 ARE FOR ALL HACIENDA, LA QUINTA & SPANISH REVIVAL ELEVATIONS SCHEME 7 8 9 10 11 TAILS, EAVES, BEAMS, KICKERS, SILL & GARAGE DOOR  %851,6+('%5$1'<  )$,5)$;%52:1  .$))((  6785'<%52:1  %5$,167250 PRECAST EMULATE TRIM  %$6.(7%(,*(  6$1'%($&+  '250(5%52:1  6$1'%($&+  $57,6$17$1 SHUTTERS  67,//:$7(5  2/,9(*529(  5()8*(  35,9,/(*(*5((1  7(55$%581 ENTRY DOOR STAIN 0$+2*$1< :$/187 :$/187 :$/187 0$+2*$1< BASE STUCCO     '$ ô$ CERAMIC TILES 6'D3$77(517,/( F62/,'7,/(  6'D3$77(517,/( F62/,'7,/(  6'D3$77(517,/( F62/,'7,/(  6'F3$77(517,/( F62/,'7,/(  6'E3$77(517,/( F62/,'7,/(  TILE GROUT $17,48(:+,7( $17,48(:+,7( $17,48(:+,7( $17,48(:+,7( $17,48(:+,7( BRICK PAINTED 7540 ARTISAN TAN 7522 MEADOWLARK 7531 CANVAS TAN 7522 MEADOWLARK 6148 WOOL SKEIN EL DORADO CAPISTRANO ADOBE BRICK MORTAR &$50(/2$'2%(%5,&. )/86+),1,6+ 0$&3/86/$77( &$50(/2$'2%(%5,&. )/86+),1,6+ 0$&3/86/$77( &$50(/2$'2%(%5,&. )/86+),1,6+ 0$&3/86/$77( &$50(/2$'2%(%5,&. )/86+),1,6+ 0$&3/86/$77( &$50(/2$'2%(%5,&. )/86+),1,6+ 0$&3/86/$77( ‘S’ ROOF       PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE:SEPTEMBER 25, 2018 CASE NO.:SPECIFIC PLAN 2018-0001, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2018-0001 APPLICANT:CCD HOTEL AND RESORTS LLC PROPERTY OWNER:REGENCY MARINITA LA QUINTA REQUEST:ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE JEFFERSON SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN (SP 2002-062), AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018- 0001 TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 160- ROOM HOTEL, 8,849 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND 25,778 SQUARE-FOOT INDOOR FOOD MARKET IN THE EXISTING JEFFERSON SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER AND RECOMMEND CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. CEQA:THE DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS PREPARED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2018- 0001 FOR THIS PROJECT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND HAS DETERMINED THAT ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THERE WILL NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT BECAUSE MITIGATION MEASURES HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT. LOCATION:LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE APN 604-521-010, 604-521-012, 604-521-013 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council certify Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 2. Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve Specific Plan 2018-0001, Amendment No. 3 to the Jefferson Square PUBLIC HEARING NO. 2 Specific Plan (SP 2002-062) and Site Development Permit 2018-0001, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: x The Jefferson Square Specific Plan (SP) was approved in January 2004 for commercial use on 10.7 acres of land, consisting of a 113,173 square-foot shopping center including a supermarket, drugstore with drive-through and a gasoline service station. x Two specific plan amendments have been approved for the site, Amendment No. 1 in November 2005 and Amendment No. 2 in May 2008. x The applicant proposes Amendment No. 3 to allow for the repurpose of the existing “Fresh and Easy” supermarket building to an indoor organic food and beverage market with dine-in facilities, construction of a three-story 160-room hotel and retail shops, and a Site Development Permit (SDP) for the architecture and landscaping of the hotel, market, and shops (Attachment 1). BACKGROUND The Jefferson Square SP (SP 2002-062) was approved in January 2004 for a 113,173 square-foot commercial shopping center on 10.7 acres at the southwest corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, consisting of a supermarket, drugstore with drive-through, in-line stores associated with the supermarket, a gasoline service station, three freestanding buildings, ancillary facilities and associated parking. SDP 2002-754 was also approved for architecture, site design and landscaping. In November 2005, Amendment No. 1 was approved that revised the project including reduction of allowable maximum building square footage to 111,470 square feet. Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 33803 was also approved. In May 2008, Amendment No. 2 was approved for a reduction of maximum floor area of 91,441 square feet to include a Fresh and Easy market, CVS drug store with a drive-through, an OSH hardware store and a bank with drive-through and smaller retail or restaurant uses. SDP 2007-898 was also approved. TPM 36241 was approved in November 2012 and to date, the Fresh and Easy market, CVS drug store and smaller retail in-line shop buildings have been constructed. Three vacant building pads remain at the southern and eastern portions of the site. The “Fresh and Easy” building was never occupied and remains vacant (Attachment 2). In September 2016, SDP 2016-0001 and CUP 2016-0002 were approved to construct a 37,776 square-foot fitness center on the vacant pad on the southwest portion of the site. The fitness center was not constructed, and the permits expired as of September 2018. PROPOSAL & ANALYSIS The applicant requests SP Amendment approval to allow for the repurpose the existing “Fresh and Easy” building into an indoor organic food and beverage market with dine-in facilities. New interior and exterior retrofits to the existing building are proposed. In addition, a three-story hotel building of 68,021 square feet, and in-line retail shops of 8,849 square feet is proposed in the southern portion of the site on the vacant building pad south of the “Fresh and Easy” building. The hotel will include 160 rooms, and associated facilities, including a bar, restaurant, and retail shops. A SDP approval is requested for landscaping and architectural design of the hotel and retail components. Specific Plan Amendment The proposed SP Amendment (Attachment 3) is a comprehensive update to the existing SP that addresses the following: 1. Development of a food market, assorted retail and service-oriented shops, and a 160-room hotel; 2. Addition of hotel uses to permitted uses of the SP; 3. Increase in allowable floor area ratio (FAR) from 0.25 to 0.30 for the entire site; 4. Increase in total building height from 35 to 41 feet; 5. Enhanced circulation discussion; and 6. Refinement to design guidelines and development standards. Site Design The existing CVS and shops buildings, parking lots, and two vacant pads and retention basin along Jefferson Street will remain as they are currently located on the site. The “Fresh and Easy” building will be renovated to accommodate the proposed food and beverage market and will serve as back of house facilities for the hotel with laundry facilities and storage areas. The hotel and retail shops will be constructed on the vacant pad to the south and integrate the “Fresh and Easy” building (Attachment 4). The existing parking spaces on the site will be sufficient to serve the hotel and food market uses. The Code requires 1 space per 300 square feet of floor area for general retail uses under 100,000 square feet and 1.1 spaces per hotel room. This results in 176 spaces for the hotel and 182 spaces for the retail uses for a total of 358 spaces required for the entire shopping center with existing and proposed uses. There are 362 existing spaces. The new site plan proposes to remove 19 spaces at the south end of the property and 4 spaces behind the “Fresh and Easy” building; however, an additional 23 spaces will be provided at the existing retention basin area at the rear of the “Fresh and Easy” building. A parking study was prepared for the site which calculated 361 required spaces based on 162 hotel rooms (Attachment 5). Since 362 spaces will be provided, there is sufficient parking for the site. Additionally, the amount of parking on site will be balanced between daytime and nighttime since the hotel use generates nighttime and early morning parking demand and the retail uses generate late morning and evening parking demand. The proposed site circulation preserves the existing circulation pattern. The existing drive aisle around the “Fresh and Easy” building and hotel pad will be modified to accommodate extra parking and delivery areas at the rear of the Fresh and Easy building and a 30-foot fire access lane at the west and south sides of the hotel. A 15-foot landscape area will be maintained along the southern boundary of the site to provide a buffer between the Monticello residences. The existing retention basin at the rear of the “Fresh and Easy” building will be converted to an underground retention system to accommodate additional parking and the City’s 100-year storm requirements. Architecture The hotel site design includes 160 rooms and suites organized around the east, south and west of a central courtyard, with a clubhouse on the north end of the hotel. The clubhouse would serve as the hotel entrance and check-in as well as provide hotel amenities such as a spa, gym, conference facilities, and restaurant/bar areas. A roof deck above the clubhouse second floor will be available for weddings or other special event gatherings. The hotel construction consists of a system of stacked shipping containers that serve as hotel rooms and a mid-century modern exterior façade to be constructed of gray concrete perforated stacked blocks (Attachment 4). The height of the hotel is proposed to be 31 feet with a 7-foot roof parapet for a total height of 38 feet. The existing specific plan allows for 35 feet of structure height with architectural projections such as roof parapets or towers up to 41 feet. Outdoor curtains along the hotel room balconies and the perforated concrete blocks provide opportunities for natural cooling and shade. The hotel rooms on the south side near the Monticello community are oriented with balconies facing inward toward the courtyard to preserve privacy. A major component of the hotel is a central courtyard open to hotel guests and nearby residents. The northern portion of the courtyard consists of a large pool with floating dining and lounging spaces. The center of the courtyard consists of a beach zone with loungers, cabanas and a bar that serves as a transition area between the pool and the southern portion of the courtyard. The southern portion incorporates an oasis theme with lush plantings, fire pits, picnic spaces and a family pool (Attachment 6). Twelve retail shops are proposed along the east hotel frontage that range between approximately 670 to 1,000 square feet. The shops are intended for luxury retail boutique uses and will incorporate elements from the existing shopping center architecture while maintaining the proposed iconic architectural appearance (Attachment 4). The food market incorporates the existing “Fresh and Easy” building façade to provide an architectural transition from the existing center to the hotel and retail shops. The food market will house approximately 40 independent vendors including, food, beverage, floral and bakeries. The interior of the market would be renovated to create internal market streets, or aisles (Attachment 7) which would have entrances at each end of the building to create a large loop, with a smaller deli counter in the middle and larger units at the edges. Landscaping The landscape plan maintains the existing landscape palette of the shopping center, which includes Willow Acacia, Desert Museum and Tipu trees along with various palm tree varieties and desert shrubs. The courtyard area would contain new landscaping and incorporates lush plantings characteristic of an oasis. Plantings include Pindo and Mexican Palms, Lantanas and Verbena along within a beach theme setting. Lighting Parking lot lighting will incorporate the existing lighting of shopping center. Lighting will be downward oriented and shielded to prevent light spillage onto surrounding properties and into the sky. Hotel hallway corridor and retail canopy lighting would incorporate ceiling mounted lights which produce a narrow lighting effect to keep the light within the hallway corridor and canopy areas. AGENCY & PUBLIC REVIEW: SB-18 and AB-52 Native American Tribal Consultation Per SB-18 and AB-52 consultation requirements, information regarding the proposed Specific Plan amendment and associated environmental document was forwarded to those tribes referenced on the Tribal Consultation List provided by the Native American Heritage Commission. Staff consulted with tribes who requested information or consultation, the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians. Their monitoring recommendations have been incorporated in the Conditions of Approval and Mitigated Negative Declaration. Public Agency Review This request was sent to all applicable City departments and affected public agencies. Given the proximity to the Bermuda Dunes Airport, the project site is located within the Bermuda Dunes Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The request was sent to the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for review of compliance with the (ALUCP). On July 12, 2018, the request was heard at a public hearing of the ALUC and was found to be consistent with the Bermuda Dunes ALUCP (Attachment 8). Conditions of approval required by ALUC have been incorporated in the recommended conditions of approval. All written comments from other public agencies have been received and are on file and available for review with the Design and Development Department. All applicable comments have been adequately addressed and/or incorporated in the recommended conditions of approval. Public Notice This project was advertised in The Desert Sun newspaper on September 14, 2018 and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site. To date, two comments have been received from adjacent property owners. Any written comments received will be handed out at the Planning Commission hearing. Public Outreach The applicant conducted a mail campaign in January 2018 that identified the project and gave contact information for the applicant and Staff. One resident had concerns regarding the noise that would be generated during construction. The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) includes noise mitigation measures requiring noise curtains during construction to reduce noise to the surrounding communities. The applicant also held an open house at the “Fresh and Easy” building site on September 8, 2018. Several residents came by, viewed the plans and left comments with the applicant regarding noise during construction, possible obstruction of views, and most were seemed pleased to see the site being further developed. The MND reviewed the project’s potential to impact views and the project was found to have a less than significant impact with landscape screening. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Design and Development Department prepared a MND for the project and determined that although the project had the potential to generate significant environmental effects; mitigation measures imposed on the project would reduce these effects to a less than significant level. The MND is included as Exhibit A of the Resolution (MND appendices: https://www.laquintaca.gov/home/showdocument?id=38691. The MND was circulated for public review to applicable agencies and interested parties for 20 days from August 16 through September 5, 2018. Three comments were received from SunLine Transit Agency, the Imperial Irrigation District and the City of Indio. Responses to these comment letters are provided below. Comment letters are included in Attachment 9. SunLine Transit Agency SunLine confirmed that there is a bus stop located at Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, as stated in the Initial Study. SunLine further recommended transit-friendly pedestrian access on Fred Waring Drive and made suggestions regarding this matter. As shown in the site plan, and discussed in the Initial Study, the project will be required to provide full improvements on the site, including sidewalks where applicable. The site has access to both Fred Waring and Jefferson Street, and future bus passengers will be able to directly access the existing bus stop on paved surfaces. Imperial Irrigation District Imperial Irrigation District provided comments generally pertaining to their conditions of service and technical requirements for service. The proposed project occurs on a partially developed site that is currently served by District facilities which have been sized for full project build out. Additional service is not anticipated, nor do project components necessitate the need for increased service on the site. The project is described and analyzed in its entirety and has not been segmented. The District was provided with all the information available to the City regarding the project. The project proponent will be conditioned to secure approval of all plans from the District prior to the initiation of construction. City of Indio The City of Indio requested the preparation of “Visualization Views” from the east side of the project site, to address potential impacts to residents of Indio. Visual simulations were prepared, and are included as Exhibits 8, 10, and 11 and discussed in the Initial Study on pages 14 through 16. These visual simulations address views to and from the residential units directly south and east of the project in the City of La Quinta. The development on the east side of Jefferson Street, in the City of Indio, consists of commercial development with single-family homes southeasterly of the project site. Given the angle and distance (approximately 500 feet from the closest residence), residents of these homes would not be impacted by the project, insofar as existing project landscaping and parking areas block their short- range views through the project. These residents currently have obstructed views of the mountains to the west, and the proposed project will not change that condition. The City of Indio also requested analysis regarding the compatibility of the hotel use by comparing it to other projects similarly entitled. The closest similar project would be the southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Washington Street, which includes a hotel, restaurant and medical offices. That location is also governed by a Specific Plan and is located along a major roadway, similar to the proposed project. The project site is in the General Commercial land use designation which allows for a full range of commercial uses, including hotels. The scope of the project is of relatively low intensity, particularly as it relates to traffic generation, when compared to currently approved retail commercial uses, and will result in a reduction of trips on area roadways (see Initial Study pages 81 through 84). Conclusion As described above, the comments received on the Initial Study do not result in the need to add substantial information, or to modify or add mitigation measures. The findings of the Initial Study do not change as a result of the comments provided. A MND remains the appropriate CEQA documentation for the project. Prepared by: Cheri Flores, Senior Planer Approved by: Gabriel Perez, Planning Manager Attachments: 1. Project Information Sheet 2. Site Photos 3. Specific Plan Amendment No. 3 4. Site Development Permit Booklet 5. Parking Study 6. Courtyard Renderings 7. Market Renderings 8. Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission Development Review letter dated July 26, 2018 9. Responses to Comments on Mitigated Negative Declaration PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE CASE NUMBERS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2018-0001 SPECIFIC PLAN 2018-0001 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 APPLICANT: CCD HOTEL AND RESORTS, LLC WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 25th day of September, 2018, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by CCD Hotel and Resorts, LLC for approval of a 160-room, 68,021 square-foot hotel, 27,741 square-foot food and beverage market and 8,849 square feet of retail shops, generally located at the southwest corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, more particularly described as: APN 604-521-010, 604-521-012, 604-521-013 WHEREAS, the Design and Development Department published a public hearing notice in The Desert Sun newspaper on September 14, 2018 as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.250.010 of the Municipal Code to justify approval of said Environmental Assessment [Exhibit A]: 1. As conditioned, proposed application will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either Planning Commission Resolution 2018 - Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 Specific Plan 2018-0001 Site Development Permit 2018-0001 Jefferson Square Hotel and Market September 25, 2018 Page 2 of 8 indirectly, or directly, in that no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2018-0001. 2. The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Potential impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level. 3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources of the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 4. The proposed project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity. Impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable can be mitigated to be less than significant. 5. The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly. Impacts associated with noise and air quality can be mitigated to be less than significant. Specific Plan (Amendment) 2018-0001 WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.240.010 of the La Quinta Municipal Code to justify recommending to the City Council approval of said Specific Plan: 1. Consistency with General Plan The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that it will result in the Planning Commission Resolution 2018 - Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 Specific Plan 2018-0001 Site Development Permit 2018-0001 Jefferson Square Hotel and Market September 25, 2018 Page 3 of 8 development of an approximate 125,000 sq. ft. shopping center which is permitted in the General Commercial land use designation. The proposed project is consistent with the following Goals and Policies: x Goal LU-6 and ED-1 as it will contribute to a balanced and varied economic base which provides fiscal stability to the City and a broad range of goods and services to its residents and the region. The hotel will generate Transient Occupancy Tax and retail uses will generate retail sales tax. x Policy LU-2.2 which requires Specific Plans for projects proposing flexible development standards that differ from the Zoning Ordinance. x Program PR-1.8.c: to promote and improve public access to farmers markets and grocery stores that sell fresh produce and healthy foods with the establishment of a supermarket at the site. x Policy AQ-1.6 which states that proposed development air quality emissions of criteria pollutants shall be analyzed under CEQA. The project’s MND analyzed these and determined that mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. x Policy BIO-1.2 which states that site-specific, species-specific surveys shall be required for species not covered by the MSHCP. The project’s MND includes mitigation that requires pre- construction surveys for burrowing owl, which is not a covered species under the MSHCP. x GOAL CUL-1 which supports protection of significant archaeological, historic and paleontological resources which occur in the City. The project’s MND includes mitigation measures to include a tribal monitor during ground disturbing activities. Planning Commission Resolution 2018 - Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 Specific Plan 2018-0001 Site Development Permit 2018-0001 Jefferson Square Hotel and Market September 25, 2018 Page 4 of 8 x GOAL N-1 which supports a healthful noise environment which complements the City’s residential and resort character. The project’s MND includes mitigation measures to reduce noise impacts to less than significant levels. x GOAL GEO-1 which supports the protection of the residents’ health and safety, and of their property, from geologic and seismic hazards. The project’s MND determined that with implementation of required building and seismic code standards, the project would have a less than significant impact on geological resources. x Policy FH-1.3 which states that the City shall continue to implement development standards that provide for a reduction in runoff from developed lands and are consistent with local and regional stormwater management plans. The project is consistent with this policy since underground retention will be provided that will contain the 100 year storm for the site. x Policy PF-1.3 which states that the City shall identify all viable financing mechanisms for the funding of construction, maintenance and operation of municipal facilities. The project will be required to pay development impact fees which is a funding mechanism for municipal facilities and public services. x The project conceptual landscape design is consistent with Goal WR-1 and Policy UTL-1.2 as it will result in the efficient use and conservation of the City’s water resources. 2. Public Welfare Approval of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to public health, safety and general welfare. The Design and Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 for this project, in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Design and Development Director has determined that although the proposed project could have a Planning Commission Resolution 2018 - Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 Specific Plan 2018-0001 Site Development Permit 2018-0001 Jefferson Square Hotel and Market September 25, 2018 Page 5 of 8 significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent and mitigation measures have been incorporated. 3. Land Use Compatibility The proposed Specific Plan incorporates a land use that is compatible with zoning on adjacent properties. The property will continue to be zoned as Neighborhood Commercial which is intended to provide for the development and regulation of small- scale commercial areas located at the intersections of arterial highways as shown on the General Plan which provide for the sale of food, drugs, sundries and personal services to meet the daily needs of a neighborhood area. The proposed food market, retail shops, personal service and recreational uses within the hotel would provide for the needs of visitors to the area as well as surrounding neighborhoods. The scope of the project is of relatively low intensity, particularly as it relates to traffic generation, when compared to currently approved retail commercial uses, and will result in a reduction of trips on area roadways. 4. Property Suitability The uses permitted in the Specific Plan are suitable and appropriate for the subject property in that the site is relatively flat, vacant, and the area can be served by all necessary public services and utilities. The proposed project is located at the intersection of arterial streets and provides convenience to goods and services to residential neighborhoods in the vicinity. Additionally, the hotel’s location near major roadways and the Interstate result in compatibility of the site with the use. Site Development Permit 2018-0001 WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Municipal Code to justify approval of said Site Development Permit: Planning Commission Resolution 2018 - Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 Specific Plan 2018-0001 Site Development Permit 2018-0001 Jefferson Square Hotel and Market September 25, 2018 Page 6 of 8 1. Consistency with General Plan The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of General Commercial. The City’s General Plan policies relating to General Commercial encourage shopping centers in the City, and the proposed use maintains those policies. The proposed project is consistent with Goal ED-1 as it will contribute to a balanced and varied economic base which provides fiscal stability to the City and a broad range of goods and services to its residents and the region. The hotel will generate Transient Occupancy Tax and retail uses will generate retail sales tax. 2. Consistency with Zoning Code The proposed development, as conditioned, is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Neighborhood Commercial District as well as the development standards of the City’s Zoning Code and Jefferson Square Specific Plan in terms of architectural style and landscaping. The project satisfies the District’s intent to provide for the development and regulation of small-scale commercial areas located at the intersections of arterial highways as shown on the general plan. The project is generally consistent with the Non- residential development standards and permitted use table, except for the inclusion of hotel uses as a permitted use, an increase in total building height and increased floor area ratio. These land use exceptions may be approved with the Specific Plan Amendment per the General Plan. 3. Compliance with CEQA The Design and Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 for this project, in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Design and Development Director has determined that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent and mitigation measures have been incorporated. Planning Commission Resolution 2018 - Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 Specific Plan 2018-0001 Site Development Permit 2018-0001 Jefferson Square Hotel and Market September 25, 2018 Page 7 of 8 4. Architectural Design The architectural design of the project, including, but not limited to, the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style and other architectural elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. 5. Site Design The site design of the project including, but not limited to, project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian and bicycle access, pedestrian amenities, screening of equipment and trash enclosures, exterior lighting, and other site design elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. 6. Landscape Design Project landscaping, including, but not limited to, the location, type, size, color, texture and coverage of plant materials, has been designed so as to provide visual relief, complement buildings, visually emphasize prominent design elements and vistas, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between adjacent land uses and between development and open space, and provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the visual continuity of the project. The proposed project is consistent with the landscaping standards and plant palette and implements the standards for landscaping and aesthetics established in the General Plan and Zoning Code. The permanent overall site landscaping utilizes various tree and shrub species to enhance the building architecture. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: SECTION 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the Findings of the Planning Commission in this case; SECTION 2. That the Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of Environmental Assessment 2018-0001, Specific Plan Planning Commission Resolution 2018 - Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 Specific Plan 2018-0001 Site Development Permit 2018-0001 Jefferson Square Hotel and Market September 25, 2018 Page 8 of 8 2018-0001, and Site Development Permit 2018-0001 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this the 25th day of September 2018, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: _________________________________ KEVIN MCCUNE, Chairperson City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: _______________________________________________ GABRIEL PEREZ, Planning Manager City of La Quinta, California CITY OF LA QUINTA 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Main Phone: (760) 777-7000 ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY Project Title: Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment & Site Development Permit Case No: SP 2018-0001; SDP 2018-0001, EA 2018-0001 Lead Agency City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 (760) 777-7000 Applicant: CCD Hotel & Resorts LLC 41-750 Rancho Las Palmas Drive Suite O-3 Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 Contact Person: Cheri Flores Senior Planner Design & Development Department City of La Quinta (760) 777-7067 Project Location: Southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street La Quinta, CA 92253 Riverside County APN: 604-521-010, 604-521-012, and 604-521-013 General Plan Designation: General Commercial Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial (CN) Surrounding Land Uses: North: Jefferson Square Business Building 44025 (Fitness, Palm Nails, Physical Therapy, and Eclipse Dentistry); Fred Waring Drive South: Monticello Residential Community East: CVS pharmacy, parking lots, undeveloped Parcel 4 and 7, and Jefferson Street West: Monticello Park (;+,%,7$ Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -2- Description of the Project: Project Location: The project site is located at the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street in the City of La Quinta, California (Exhibit 1, 2, and 3). The subject site is bounded by Fred Waring Drive and an existing Jefferson Square retail building on the north, Monticello Park on the west, the Monticello residential subdivision on the south, and Jefferson Square improvements, including a CVS pharmacy, parking lots, undeveloped Parcel 4 and 7, and Jefferson Street on the east (Exhibit 4). Existing Site Conditions: The project site is located in the Jefferson Square Specific Plan (Specific Plan), which was approved in 2004. Currently, the majority of the Specific Plan area is developed as planned in the approved Specific Plan as a shopping center, including a drug store, freestanding retail shops, a closed Fresh and Easy Store, a retention basin, and associated parking lots. Initially, the whole site of the Specific Plan area was part of Assessor’s Parcel No. 604-070-003 which was designated as Neighborhood Commercial (CN) in both the City’s General Plan and Zoning Maps. In 2004, Assessor’s Parcel number 604-070-003 was subdivided into seven sub parcels (Parcel 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7) through Parcel Map No. 36241. Currently, the Specific Plan area is designated as General Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial (CN) in the City’s General Plan and Zoning Maps, respectively. Currently, the Specific Plan sub parcels are developed as follows: Jefferson Square Parcel No. Riverside County Assessor’s Parcel number Size (Acres) Current Development Parcel 1 604-521-007 1.47 CVS pharmacy; Parking Lot Parcel 2 604-521-009 0.81 Jefferson Square Building 44025 (Fitness, Palm Nails, Physical Therapy, and Eclipse Dentistry); Parking Lot Parcel 3 and 5 604-521-010 and 604-521-012 1.86 and 0.45 Fresh and Easy Store; Retention Basin; Parking Lot Parcel 4 604-521-011 0.58 Unpaved vacant land Parcel 6 604-521-013 4.09 Unpaved pad; Parking Lot Parcel 7 604-521-014 1.01 Unpaved pad; Retention Basin The Specific Plan area currently has four access points: two driveways on Fred Waring Drive (one right-in, right-out and left-in and one right-in and right-out) and two on Jefferson Street (both right- in, right-out only) (Exhibit 4 and 5). Project Site Background: In 2004, the Jefferson Square Specific Plan was approved for mixed-commercial use on 10.7 acres of land. The Specific Plan consisted of seven building areas, and included plans for a 50,000 square foot supermarket, an 18,500 square foot drugstore with drive-through, in-line stores associated with the supermarket, a gasoline service station at the corner of the Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, two 5,000 square foot free-standing buildings, a 7,200 square foot freestanding building, ancillary facilities and associated parking. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -3- The entire shopping center, including the project site, is currently designated as General Commercial in the City’s General Plan Land Use Map, which allows full range of commercial uses, ranging from supermarkets and drugstores in a neighborhood shopping center, to major national retailers in large buildings. General Commercial uses also include professional offices, service businesses, restaurants, hotels or motels, research and development and warehousing or similar low impact quasi-industrial projects. The City’s Zoning Map currently designates Parcels 4 and 7 as Neighborhood Commercial (CN) which allows retail stores, food, liquor and convenience stores, plant nurseries and garden supply stores, general services, banks, general and professional offices, medical offices, restaurants and other commercial uses. The Specific Plan identifies these parcels as including a drive-through pad (potentially a restaurant or a bank) and free-standing shops. The Specific Plan was a comprehensive plan with regulations and guidelines that addressed not only the mixed-commercial development plans, but also projected benefits of the mixed-commercial development on the surrounding area. Project Description: The project site consists of three parcels: numbers 3, 5, and 6 in the western half of the Specific Plan, totaling 6.40 acres. The Applicant is proposing a Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment that would result in the rehabilitation of the existing Fresh and Easy store building (Parcels 3 and 5) to an indoor organic food and beverage market with dine-in facilities, which would involve new interior and exterior retrofits to the existing building (Exhibit 5 and 6). Furthermore, the Applicant is proposing construction of a three-story hotel building of 68,021 square feet and retail shops totaling 8,849 square feet in the southern portion of the site which is part of Parcel 6 (Exhibit 5). The hotel will include 160 rooms, as well as associated facilities, including a bar, restaurant, and retail shops. A Site Development Permit is also proposed for approval of the landscaping and architectural design of the hotel and retail components of the project. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is a comprehensive update to the existing Specific Plan that addresses the development of a food market, assorted retail and service-oriented shops, and a 160- room hotel. The Amendment also includes an increase in the allowable floor area ratio (FAR) from 0.25 to 0.30 for the entire site including parcels 3, 5, and 6, an enhanced circulation discussion, refinement to the design guidelines and development standards, and new landscape design guidelines. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would guide the use, density, and design of the proposed rehabilitation of the existing building and development of the hotel building within the Specific Plan boundary. The project will be implemented in two phases: Phase I will include the rehabilitation of the existing Fresh and Easy store building. Phase II will result in the construction of the three-story hotel building in the southern portion of the project site (Exhibit 5 and 13). Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -4- Access to the project site will be provided through existing driveways on Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. Interior circulation improvements include the expansion of one of the inner driveways along the west side of the site for truck deliveries and fire access. Interior driveways also exist among the buildings within the project site. The Project requires the following applications: •Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment (SP 2018-0001); •Environmental Assessment (EA 2018-0001) and •Site Development Permit (SDP 2018-0001). Utilities and Service Providers The following agencies and companies will provide service to the project site: 1. Sanitary Sewer: Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) 2. Water: Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) 3. Electricity: Imperial Irrigation District (IID) 4. Gas: The Gas Company 5. Telephone: Frontier 6. Storm Drain: City of La Quinta Environmental Setting and Surrounding Land Uses: The subject property is located in the northern portion of the City of La Quinta, in an area characterized by residential and commercial land uses. The site is relatively flat and partially developed (Exhibit 4). Surrounding land uses include: North: Jefferson Square Building 44025 (Fitness, Palm Nails, Physical Therapy, and Eclipse Dentistry); Fred Waring Drive South: Monticello residential community East: CVS pharmacy, parking lots, undeveloped Parcel 4 and 7, and Jefferson Street West: Monticello Park Other Required Public Agencies Approval: Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). 10 owed rm SpHryr gYm Sp�ing� . Ga rR31 iI nanOm MIS PM1M DIA t, �Ardb hden ZI [q�hr La Quints RIVERSIDE COUNTY L TERRA NOVA W-ANNING d R66C4R74, 3G Jefiferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Regional Location Map La Quinta, California f R Snuroe= �J j T � Y I } � SITE : �fiC�lO IIiIC '1 Winta Coachella as I F 19 Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Exhit}it ►. TERRA NOVA Project Vicinity Map Le Gluinte, California 4F.. x- . `3 -� � it ���*�• -��� f � jLt,r � A��� •l`... �4' � SjT��ilC %} ` fY■i y � �{ 4 w. If ... �.. i ��VY + PROJECT _ SITE •�F �� Mf...+ ' -� /y 2 N 1-� ail r r� S'" _. •-ry' �' A,44 71; Source: Gong% Maps. 2017 0' F" -I Cb Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Exhibit 6. j TERRA NOVA Area location Map PUW�W4PEUEAPOI .K La Ouinta, CaIitarnia F I Jefferson Square Specific plan Amendment txranis L d TERRA NOVA project Location Map � h..... La Quinta, California 1 0 wNwoe Mik i d 0 Ci o +-i 0 0 ` l:narr �rsuna MOM "XI SF Rrlmlian hrea . � 1 I I 4— eA � 1h Ell 111 1111 111 11�1 �z I ZL 111 1E kt►1�1 --------------- —1 { r r • + � 5�apr S ' rvs I urc I - - LAvh Shore 1 � I I W1.%013 SF 4 1%d A I i i - _ � rrHrHn rt 3 illl I.anJ rCtpf � i _ � Rncneian.5 - u K. — __ - -- — -- - Sovw: CC D lfioWs & Re*". 2010 4 i, 1 Jeff usan Square Specific Plan Amendment Exhibit TERRA NOVA Project Site Plan K,W�k:: —Fl " La Quints, Cal Homia Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -10- ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology /Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology / Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities / Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -11- DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature August 16, 2018 Date Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -12- EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -13- I. AESTHETICS: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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 and its surroundings?  d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?  Source: 2035 General Plan; La Quinta Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code; California Department of Transportation (California Scenic Highway Mapping System); http://www.dot.ca.gov/design/lap/livability/scenic-highways/; Accessed March 2018; Project Specific Visualizations and Photographs. Setting The project site is situated in the southwestern region of the Coachella Valley within the City of La Quinta, which is surrounded by the San Bernardino, San Jacinto, and Santa Rosa Mountain Ranges. The San Bernardino, Santa Rosa, and San Jacinto Mountain Ranges have a significant rise over the valley floor with elevations of 11,489 feet (3,502 meters), 8,716 feet (2,657 m), and 10,834 feet (3,302 m), respectively. The Salton Sea, at an elevation of approximately 200 feet below sea level, is located in the southeast portion of the valley. The foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains extend along the westerly and southerly portion of the City, approximately 2 miles southwest of the subject property. The foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains extend beyond the northern and eastern portions of the City, approximately 3.99 miles from the subject property. The Santa Rosa and San Bernardino Mountain Ranges are of aesthetic value to the City. Therefore, the City enforces ordinances for the new developments to ensure that any new development in the City does not conflict with any scenic resource programs that may be in place to preserve aesthetic resources. Ultimate development of the site will result in the construction of a hotel of up to three stories in height. The Aesthetic impacts of the project are discussed below. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -14- Discussion of Impacts a)Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located approximately 2 miles northeast of the Santa Rosa Mountains, which are considered a scenic vista for much of the City of La Quinta and Coachella Valley (Exhibit 2 and 4). From the subject property, scenic views of the Santa Rosa Mountains are to the west, southwest, and south (Exhibit 7). Views of the San Bernardino Mountains are to the north, northeast, and east. The subject site is located in an urban area and surrounded by local streets and developed lands in all directions. Lands immediately to the north and east are currently developed and occupied by commercial buildings, parking lots, and paved roads, which extend up to one story (Exhibit 6A and 6B). These developments block foothill views of mountains to the north and northeast. However, upper elevations of the mountains are visible above (Exhibit 7). Lands immediately to the west are currently developed as Monticello Park (Exhibit 4 and 7). In the south, the site is adjacent to the Monticello community, whose homes block the views of the mountains. However, the mountains are visible to the south and west, at great distance. Lower elevations are blocked by buildings and landscaping. Phase I Effect on Scenic Views: Currently, the subject property is partially developed and is surrounded by residential and commercial buildings to the north, east, and south and by the park in the west. Existing buildings within the Specific Plan are up to one story in height (Exhibit 6A and 6B). Structures on these properties are consistent with other urban development in the area in scale and height (Exhibit 7). The existing Fresh and Easy store is a one-story building (Exhibit 6A) and rehabilitation of that building will not impact views on Fred Waring, Jefferson Street, and surrounding development. Building appearances and materials can be expected to be similar to existing structures in the area (Exhibit 6A). Phase II Effect on Scenic Views: The development of the proposed hotel building on the southern portion of the subject site could extend up to 38 feet in height, which would be taller than the surrounding structures and would result in view blockage from viewers to the south (Exhibit 5 and 9). Monticello residences would have a three-story building view to the north (Exhibit 9). However, currently, these residences have limited views to the north due to the presence of the six-foot wall and up to 30 foot tall trees (Exhibit 7). Views to the north do not provide views of the San Bernardino mountains from this location, because of the existence of intervening development and distance. Views from the Monticello homes are to the west, southwest and south, and will not be impacted by the proposed project. The ultimate construction of a hotel building on the site would result in limited obstruction of views for viewers looking to the east from Monticello Park, insofar as three stories would result in short-range view blockage. Views to the east, however, do not include scenic vistas, as mountain ranges do not occur. Further, the Monticello Park is at a lower elevation than the site, so it already has limited views to the east. Views to the north, west and south from Monticello Park would not be impacted by the proposed project. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -15- The inclusion of the hotel building on the site would result in some view blockage from Jefferson Street westerly. The lower slopes of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains would be obstructed from this location, but the views of the upper slopes and peaks would remain. Overall, although there will be some impact from the proposed project on short-range views to the north and west, impacts to views of scenic vistas from surrounding properties will be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The site is not located along or near an existing or proposed state scenic highway or locally designated scenic highways. The nearest designated scenic highway is State Route 74 (SR 74) which is located approximately 7.10 miles southwest of the project site. Both Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street are designated as Image Corridors in the City’s 2035 General Plan and provide valuable visual character and resources to the City (General Plan; Exhibit II-4 Image Corridors). The three-story hotel building will be visible from Jefferson Street; however, the hotel building occurs well back from the roadway, and is beyond the minimum setback requirements contained in the City’s Municipal Code Section 13.24.090. No scenic resources such as groves of trees or rock outcroppings and historic buildings are located on the project site. Therefore, there will be less than significant impacts to scenic resources. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The subject site is currently partially developed. The existing Fresh and Easy store building occupies 8,428 square feet of space. In addition, there are 194 parking spaces and a retention basin on the site currently. Development of the project as a whole has also included a pharmacy and a retail building on the north boundary of the project. The proposed project would rehabilitate the Fresh and Easy store building and incorporate design features to unify the building with the hotel structure. In addition, the ultimate development of the hotel on the southern portion of the site will result in the construction of a three-story building. The proposed development will result in commercial and retail land uses and will convert partially developed land to an indoor organic food and beverage market with dine-in facilities and a hotel. The proposed development will be consistent with commercial development in the Specific Plan vicinity, insofar as commercial development occurs currently on the east side of Jefferson Street. The visual character of both Fred Waring and Jefferson Street have been affected by the existing improvements within the Specific Plan area, and the proposed project will not change that current visual character. The size and design of the hotel would not result in significant effects since it incorporates desirable architectural features, does not conflict with existing City's standards, and does not substantially depart from the size and scale of the City's Municipal Code Section 9.90.040 (Table of development standards). Setbacks between the hotel and the existing residential area will also provide relief in view corridors to the north. The hotel’s architectural style, and the limited view obstruction it will create, will reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -16- Views from the Hotel’s 3rd Floor Balcony to the South, Southwest, and West: The residential land use in the south and west have expectations for privacy. Therefore, the Applicant has generated visualization views for the 3rd floor of the hotel to demonstrate the residential land uses privacy (Exhibit 10 and 11). According to the visualization view, the guest/visitor or hotel employees would have limited views of the residential development in the south, southwest, and west. Currently, there are screening trees along the property line in the south and west. The Applicant is proposing to provide more screening trees (Exhibit 11 and 12), as part of the landscape plan, along the project boundary in the south and west to secure privacy to neighbors. Overall, although there will be some impact from the proposed project on short-range views to the south, west, north, and east, impacts to views into surrounding properties will be less than significant. In addition, screening trees and landscape will secure the privacy to neighbors in the south and west. The proposed project would not make significant changes to the visual character that currently exists in the northern portion of the site. However, in the southern portion, it will change the vacant land to hotel building which would improve its visual character and be consistent with the commercial development in the existing shopping center. The Amended Specific Plan (2018) is a comprehensive update to the existing Jefferson Square Specific Plan (2007) which incorporates refinement to the design guidelines, development standards and landscape design guidelines. The Design Guidelines for the Amended Specific Plan encourage creativity, imagination and a high level of harmony and consistency within the surrounding community for the project site. These Guidelines will govern and improve the design quality of the proposed project. The Amended Specific Plan (2018) design standards will be incorporated into the project to assure that project’s visual character is consistent with surrounding development. Architectural design would be subject to review by the City of La Quinta to ensure that the project is designed to be aesthetically compatible with its surroundings. Any new structures would also meet the site’s scale and massing requirements. As such, less than significant impacts to visual character would occur. d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in a highly urbanized area and is currently illuminated by existing on-site lighting and lighting associated with the commercial buildings in the north and northeast. Additionally, adjacent street lights and light sources associated with Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street also illuminate the project site. The site is currently partially developed and occupied by a Fresh and Easy store building and three public parking lots. The Fresh and Easy store building is currently vacant. All three parking lots are fully paved and includes lighting and landscaping. Currently, all three parking lots are being used by visitors, occasionally creating new sources of light affecting nighttime views in the lot; therefore, there are stationary and mobile light sources onsite. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -17- Rehabilitation of the existing Fresh and Easy store building to an indoor organic food and beverage market with dine-in facilities would involve new interior and exterior retrofits to the existing building, as well as a coordinated construction for the proposed hotel and commercial areas. Additionally, the proposed hotel building would involve indoor and outdoor lighting related to the new three-story building. The ultimate development of the proposed project on the site can be expected to generate increased levels of light and glare from interior and exterior building lighting, safety and security lighting, landscape lighting, and vehicles accessing the site. Glare can also be expected from building windows. However, new outdoor lighting would be limited to the minimum levels necessary for safety. The project will be designed according to the City’s Zoning Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 9.100.150 Outdoor lighting) and will properly shield light fixtures to minimize spillage onto adjacent properties. The City’s standards prohibiting reflective surfaces will assure that glare impacts are less than significant. Lighting and glare levels are not expected to exceed typical levels within the surrounding urban environment. Project-related light and glare impacts will be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. . I 1' I r I I - it r ONE iV Sadufco= Farm Nava Planning & Rosmmb, Inc., 2018 Exhibit i, ' Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment L j TERRA NOVA Existing Conditions A _ rLt�MhGB R[SL+PCII iVZ La Quinta, California NrlFrTF4 =u J*fl*rwn $qUwO The F P9wn Am4ndmpnt 4 � TERRA �A7'iti�' wle,.i irom The Project Bloc a,eo r LA awirk . CMllpreli SOUTH JEFFE R SON STREET ENTRANCE i � F•� � # . F 1 ! i irr 3 J4 YiMN1 GYRsLa d EffiirYC �P11411yII11W11 YIi�N SI �dNWM1Y ., a, eo�r LIF fl1Nl1t#. NOAI1� x 7 dog: r�90BYY[ilrEr -. .. _x rw C�•� �s r[lyaTIS1 rl � a _ � FE NMI PIF114 P 1■ •�L �Nl footrYrwm ti _. n M M F ■ ■ rt . Y a n a y . n . n . . Y r HL � L � PART1+4rpEg uds. 2GT8 !ti4 F" 19 Jefferson Square Spec irtic Pien Amendment Exhibit L A TERRA NOVA Elevations h,:.,.,.. kx .. " La Quinta. California ;.k19T ga V11 jTArld1 uTeu er CC D wu9aL-; d RvwrI*. 20 10 Od itl7 23 sC71W-11 ,�•�CIT �*iC T�.�.1�-A-A RIM I .] a ii� - `- -` :JL4fAL 3 _�� T3 V19uri. r7,4j f_ i QT 24 4fii&IIAIIMY Q F, 19 Jefferson Square Specific Plzen Amendment Exhibit L A TERRA NOVA Visualization View from the South (Hotel Parking) 1 � h....., La Ouinta, California r ;1Il7 29 SCST1Ry=A ALLOT �.YCLTf}i� ¢LyZi.T PA4L7f�LLLCDa2 i�jj�� _ 4 L'— --- L� I k I rr .:13 R.AH-A i.0 VFL 3 CS LfRLFST 9AL C[hY VifV PLiW-A LEVEL 3 y L1 Yl.LDT v]SLxLL„ a�.s+rsr ani rnwr t15LIhLiISI]OFi $-9 • �, ucr�,� � tl+ _ A SDUFW: CCD MtWL; & Re*". 201 B � I► 19 Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Exhibit TERRA NOVA Vistiakization View to the south, southwest and west (3rd Roor Sslcony) 71 L„W�k:: AI— " La Quints, California M1 rlrr 1 pat*�.t 4.ilYr+M FrJ7rr a�141.+w..rl rr.r- •Y •.FFr � a#r.rr w.r J rrwr h.. Jar I.rrl. M1'rrf +I+r lr.ri Rrif �rrrl+.• IN Ylr. Rrr�..FI+ rrr+rrJrlr It 1r+{II+r Ir trrl.r�r. lrrr trR+iJ.rrY is ...jrv• ri t+r..•+r a+ rri+.Yrr Ilr+r.f lt.•rt Jrll�r•a #r! i rr.li r .+�rl I.r.r tarlr.R Nr• y!� t� 7 Al r'rrt++rI N./+rs,l+ .+,r sr. jNa+iraNJ Yr PARi1 ArEmiNdF, nT8 -.P,.—z F" 19 Jeffemon Square Specific Plan Amendment L d TERRA NOVA Preliminary landscape Plan , Fkx .. " La Quintar California rr, N '�' * a �n r * y� n � �wa,• � �Yl Ly V� 5 rrr b� R i- illf I SE gy p j V4V I MA Irw,20 r 4 4 f 1 + c4 i# R Ad 0- +'P,SRS:EL SI { M wm owrA1G w wMk m Ear T# i{a Y`rMY •� ..+.���� Y�Y •�M#w rt3���� �� rra. raar.r�aw wr Q F, 19 Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Exhibit L A TERRA NO A� Preliminary Grading Plan 1 La Quintar California Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -27- II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use?  b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?  c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?  d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?  Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -28- e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?  Source: 2035 General Plan; California Department of Conservation, January 2012, and Riverside County Important Farmland Map, 2016; Jefferson Square Amended Specific Plan. Setting The project site is located in an area of the City designated for Neighborhood Commercial (CN) on the Jefferson Square Specific Plan land use map. The site is partially developed and there are no active agricultural lands within the vicinity of the project. Discussion of Impacts a-e) No Impact. Prime Farmland The project site is designated as “Urban and Built-Up Land” on the Important Farmlands Map for Riverside County. No prime or unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance exists within the project site or vicinity. The project site is not located on or near any property zoned or otherwise intended for agricultural uses. Therefore, no impact to state-designated agricultural land would occur. Williamson Act No land on or near the project site is under Williamson Act contract. The proposed Specific Plan Amendments and development will not conflict with zoning for agricultural uses or a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, no impact would occur. Forest Land The project site is currently zoned as Neighborhood Commercial (CN) and is a part of the Jefferson Square Specific Plan. There are no forest land or timberland areas in the vicinity of the project. The proposed project will result minor amendments to the Specific Plan, however, it would not conflict with the existing zoning or cause rezoning of forest land or timberland resources, and no impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -29- III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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 projected 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 federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?  d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?  e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?  Source: 2035 General Plan; “Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology,” prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Revised, July 2008; “2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan,” August 1, 2003; CalEEMod Version 2016.3.1; Project materials.) Setting The Coachella Valley, including the project site, is located in the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). All development within the SSAB is subject to SCAQMD’s 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (2016 AQMP) and the 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (2003 CV PM10 SIP). The SCAQMD operates and maintains regional air quality monitoring stations at numerous locations throughout its jurisdiction. The project site is located within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes monitoring stations in Palm Springs and Indio, as well as a newly opened station in the unincorporated community of Thermal. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -30- Criteria air pollutants are contaminants for which state and federal air quality standards have been established. The Salton Sea Air Basin exceeds st ate and federal standards for fugitive dust (PM10) and ozone (O3) and is in attainment/unclassified for PM2.5. Ambient air quality in the SSAB, including the project site, does not exceed state and federal standards for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxides, sulfur dioxide, lead, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, or Vinyl Chloride. Build out of the proposed project will result in site disturbance during construction, and long-term impacts associated with operation of the project, as discussed further below. Discussion of Impacts a) No Impact. The subject site is located within the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) and will be subject to SCAQMD’s 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (2016 AQMP) and the 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (2003 CV PM10 SIP). The AQMP is a comprehensive plan that establishes control strategies and guidance on regional emission reductions for air pollutants. The AQMP is based, in part, on the land use plans of the jurisdictions in the region. The proposed project will marginally increase the commercial development in the City. However, since the current zone allows the uses proposed, and the property is designated for commercial use in the General Plan, this intensity has been planned for in the AQMP. Improvements in technology and reductions in emissions associated with improved building standards with the 2016 Building Code will further improve project related air quality by imposing stringent standards for the reduction of energy use. The proposed project will be subject to rules and guidelines set forth in the AQMP. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the intent of the AQMP and will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. No impact is anticipated. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2016.3.1 was used to project air quality emissions that will be generated by the proposed project (Appendix A). As part of the project, a hotel building with retail shops totaling 76,870 square feet will be constructed. The Fresh and Easy Store existing building (25,778 square feet) will also be renovated as part of the project. The project would also include drive-aisle improvements behind the hotel and removal of retention basin on 25,778 square feet. In CalEEMod, only 2.42 acres (105,763 square feet) are being analyzed for air quality analysis and not the entire Specific Plan area because the majority of the Specific Plan area is already built or will be built in the future and is not part of this project. An additional 25,778 square feet is also included in the CalEEMod model to consider the drive-aisle improvements behind hotel and removal of a retention basin. Criteria air pollutants will be released during all the phases (i.e. rehabilitation, construction, and operational) of the proposed project, as shown in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1 summarizes short-term construction-related emissions, and Table 2 summarizes ongoing emissions generated during operation. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -31- Construction Emissions: The construction period includes both phases of the project: Phase I (rehabilitation of the existing commercial structures) and Phase II (construction of the hotel building). The analysis also included all other aspects of project development, including site preparation, grading, hauling, paving, building construction, and application of architectural coatings. For analysis purposes, and for conservative projections, it is assumed that buildout of both the phases will occur over a 1 year period. The following assumptions were made for construction: • Total acreage: ~ 3.01 acres; • Total building square footage (hotel, retail shops and the Fresh and Easy Store building): 105,763 SF; • Drive-aisle improvements and removal of a retention basin: 25,778 SF; • Total import of materials: 5,700 CY; • Total export of materials: 11,500 CY; • SCAQMD Rule 403: Fugitive Dust Control standards applied as required; and • SCAQMD Rule 1113: Architectural Coatings standards applied as required. As shown in Table 1, emissions generated by construction activities will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for any criteria pollutant. The data reflect average daily mitigated emissions over the one year construction period, including summer and winter weather conditions. The analysis assumes 17,200 cubic yards of material/soils will be imported/exported to the site during grading. Applicable standard requirements and best management practices include, but are not limited to, the implementation of a dust control and management plan in conformance with SCQAMD Rule 403, proper maintenance and limited idling of heavy equipment, phasing application of architectural coatings and the use of low-polluting architectural paint and coatings. Construction related impacts are considered less than significant. Table 1 Maximum Daily Construction-Related Emissions Summary (pounds per day) Construction Emissions1 CO NOx ROG SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Maximum 23.81 45.97 24.94 0.04 7.33 4.66 SCAQMD Thresholds 550.00 100.00 75.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 Exceeds? No No No No No No 1 Average of winter and summer emissions. Includes implementation of fugitive dust control measures and architectural coating standards required by SCAQMD under Rule 403 and Rule 1113, respectively. Emission Source: CalEEMod model, version 2016.3.1. Operational Emissions: Operational emissions are ongoing emissions that will occur over the life of the project. They include area source emissions, emissions from energy demand (electricity), and mobile source (vehicle) emissions. Traffic generation trip rates were derived from the project-specific traffic report. A portion of the project site is existing and developed. The Fresh and Easy Store never operated after buildout, so it has never been generating emissions. It was assumed that the addition Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -32- of the hotel and the rehabilitation of the Fresh and Easy story would generate an estimated 3,457 daily trips, while buildout of the entire Jefferson Square site would result in 5,500 daily trips. Table 2 provides a summary of projected emissions during operation of the proposed project. Table 2 Maximum Daily Operational-Related Emissions Summary (pounds per day) Operational Emissions1 CO NOx ROG SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Maximum 13.16 13.16 5.38 0.09 0.13 0.13 SCAQMD Thresholds 550.00 100.00 75.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 Exceeds? No No No No No No 1 Average of winter and summer emissions. Includes implementation of fugitive dust control measures and architectural coating standards required by SCAQMD under Rule 403 and Rule 1113, respectively. Emission Source: CalEEMod model, version 2016.3.1. As Table 2 shows, operational emissions will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance for any criteria pollutants. Impacts related to operation will be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. As stated above, the subject area is located in the Coachella Valley portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin, which is classified as a “non-attainment” area for PM10 and ozone. The 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan was adopted in order to achieve attainment. This Plan established strict standards for dust management for development proposals. The proposed project will contribute to an incremental increase in regional PM10 and ozone emissions, but will be required to implement SIP requirements and SCAQMD rules and regulations for the management of dust, and will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Due to its limited size and scope, and the implementation of standard requirements, including the implementation of dust management plans, overall cumulative impacts are not expected to be significant for PM10 or ozone precursors (NOx and CO). The project will result in less than significant impacts. d) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The nearest sensitive receptors are single-family residences located within 120 feet south of the project site. To determine if the proposed project has the potential to generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts, the mass rate Localized Significance Threshold (LST) Look-Up Table was used. The City of La Quinta and the project property are located within Source Receptor Area 30 (Palm Spring, Indio, and Mecca/Coachella Valley). Based on the project’s size and proximity to existing housing, the 2-acre site tables at a distance of 50- meters were used for air quality analysis. Table 3 shows on-site emission concentrations for project construction and the associated LST. The analysis found that during construction, PM10 had a potential to exceed the LST threshold due to the import and export of material/soils to and from the site. To reduce the PM10 emissions, certain mitigation measures will be applicable to the project which are provided at the end of this section. As shown in Table 3, with implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts to sensitive receptors will be less than significant. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -33- Table 3 Mitigated Localized Significance Thresholds Worse-Case Emissions (pounds per day) CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 Construction 23.81 45.97 7.33 4.66 LST Threshold* 1,931.00 225.00 22.00 7.00 Exceed? No No No No Operation1 13.16 13.16 0.13 0.13 LST Threshold* 1,931.00 225.00 6.00 2.00 Exceed? No No No No Emission Source: CalEEMod model, version 2016.3.1 LST Threshold Source: LST Mass Rate Look-up Table, SCAQMD. 1. Operational emissions that effect sensitive receptors are limited to on-site area emissions. Energy and mobile emissions occur off-site. e) Less Than Significant Impact. Typical odor-generating land uses include, but are not limited to, wastewater treatment plants, landfills, and composing facilities. The proposed project would not introduce any such land uses. Diesel fumes from construction equipment and delivery trucks could be found to be objectionable; however, construction is temporary and substantial deliveries would not be associated with the proposed project. Thus, the project would not result in any noticeable objectionable odors associated with construction or delivery truck diesel fumes. Hotels and indoor organic food and beverage markets are not typically associated with the creation of objectionable odors. The proposed project includes an on-site restaurant, which would involve food preparation that could result in cooking exhaust and smoke, and related food waste. As odors are highly subjective, one receptor may consider cooking exhaust and related smoke as a pleasant odor, while another receptor may find such odors objectionable. Nonetheless, the on- site restaurant would include a hood system that consists of particulate filtration for smoke, gas filtration for gases/odors, and a blower to move the air into the hood, through the air cleaning equipment, and then outdoors. Therefore, such odors would be quickly dispersed below detectable levels as distance from the site increases. Furthermore, the SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance), and SCAQMD Best Available Control Technology Guidelines would limit potential objectionable odor impacts during the proposed project’s long-term operations phase. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: AQ-1 The following measures shall be implemented during project earth moving, grading and construction activities: •Construction equipment, delivery trucks, worker vehicles, and haul trucks will limit idling time to no more than 5 minutes. •The grading contractor shall certify in writing that all construction equipment is properly serviced and maintained in good operating condition. Certification shall be provided to City Engineer for review and approval. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -34- •Cover all transported loads of soils, wet materials prior to transport, provide freeboard (space from the top of the material to the top of the truck) to reduce PM10 and deposition of particulate matter during transportation. •Diesel-powered construction equipment shall utilize aqueous diesel fuels, and be equipped with diesel oxidation catalysts. •Water site and equipment morning and evening and during all earth-moving operations. •Wash off trucks as they leave the project site as necessary to control fugitive dust emissions. •Construction equipment and materials shall be sited as far away from residential and park uses as practicable. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: AQ-A The City Engineer and Public Works inspector shall regularly monitor the construction site to assure that the measures are implemented throughout earth moving and grading operations. Responsible Party: City Engineer, Public Works Division Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -35- IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?  b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?  c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?  d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?  e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?  f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?  Source: 2035 General Plan; “Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan,” 2007. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -36- Setting The subject site has been previously disturbed by existing development and is surrounded on all sides by development, including paved roads, parking lots, and commercial buildings. The vacant sites within Jefferson Square were graded when the project was initially developed. Undeveloped parcels in the Specific Plan area typically consist of scattered regrowth of Sonoran creosote bush scrub and ornamental landscaping, and contain very little native vegetation. The City of La Quinta’s General Plan (2012) and Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (2007) were referenced to analyze potential impacts to biological resources associated with the proposed development. Based on the literature review, the proposed project is not located within a MSHCP Conservation or Linkage Area, or a predetermined Survey Area for narrow endemic or criteria area plant species, or a Survey Area for amphibians or mammals. Rehabilitation of the Fresh and Easy store and construction of the hotel will not significantly affect Biological Resources, as discussed below. a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The majority of the site is currently in use as a commercial building and public parking lots and is landscaped with decorative plant species and trees. There are no special status species on the property. The chances for any potential sensitive plant and wildlife species to occur onsite are negligible. Buildings and other structures (e.g. lighting poles, and fences) currently occupying the project site and offer no nesting opportunities for birds covered under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Surrounding landscaping at residential and commercial buildings, vacant parcels, and retention basins immediately adjacent to the project site could provide suitable habitat for nesting, but will not be impacted by the proposed project. Trees and bushes occurring on the perimeter of the undeveloped pad proposed for the hotel use, existing parking lot and retention basins, however, could provide habitat for nesting birds. When rehabilitating the site, there could be an impact to these species due to site improvements and construction activities. Under the MBTA, nesting birds must be protected until they fledge. Disturbance of any active nests could, therefore, result in a significant impact to nesting birds, if construction activities are initiated during the nesting season. Therefore, a pre-construction survey will be required to avoid impacts to nesting birds covered by the MBTA. The project site is not located in or adjacent to an existing or proposed MSHCP Conservation area. The proposed development will have no impact to species listed in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. b, c) No Impact. The project site does not contain any streams, riparian habitat, marshes, protected wetlands, vernal pools or sensitive natural communities protected by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. No project-related impacts will occur. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -37- d) No Impact. The subject property is located in an urban area and surrounded by roadways and residential and commercial developments. Due to surrounding human activity for many decades, the site does not contain features that are suitable for a migratory wildlife corridor. No project- related impacts will occur. e, f) No Impact. As the project site is not located within the CVMSHCP, the proposed development will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance, nor will it conflict with the provisions of the CVMSHCP, a Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. No impact is anticipated. Mitigation Measures: BIO-1: Within 14 days of the initiation of any ground disturbing activity on the site during the nesting season (generally from January 15 through July 31 for the Coachella Valley) a qualified biologist shall conduct an MBTA compliant nesting bird survey. If ground disturbance occurs outside the nesting season, this requirement shall be waived. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: BIO-A Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for any portion of the site, the applicant shall submit a written report, prepared by a qualified biologist, reporting on the findings of an MBTA compliant bird survey. The findings and recommendations of the survey will be integrated into grading plan conditions. Responsible Party: Project biologist, Public Works Division Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -38- V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5?  b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?  c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?  d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?  Source: 2035 General Plan; “Archaeological Monitoring Report for Jefferson Square Project,” prepared by CRM TECH in 2009. Setting Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines generally defines a historic resource as a resource that is: (1) listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register); (2) included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code); or (3) identified as significant in an historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code). Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register. The California Register automatically includes all properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) and those formally determined to be eligible for listing in the National Register. Section 15064.5(a)(3)(D) of the CEQA Guidelines generally defines archaeological resources as any resource that “has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.” Archaeological resources are features, such as tools, utensils, carvings, fabric, building foundations, etc., that document evidence of past human endeavors and that may be historically or culturally important to a significant earlier community. It is believed that an early settlement of the “Cahuilla” people has occurred in this region around 1000 BC. The descendants of the Pass and Desert Cahuilla are now associated with several local reservations, such as Torres Martinez, Cabazon, and Augustine to the east and south of the City, and the Agua Caliente and Morongo to the west. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -39- The completion of the Southern Pacific Railroad line in the 1870s began an influx of settlers in the Coachella Valley. Based on certain federal laws, the public land in the valley was opened for private land claims in the 1880s. At the turn of the 20th century, the first land was claimed in the La Quinta area, and by the 1910s a number of ranches were operating in the La Quinta area. The tourism industry began to establish in the area around 1920s and the construction of the first hotel, La Quinta Hotel, begun in 1926 by Walter Morgan. La Quinta Hotel was a first-class hotel which became an attraction for Hollywood stars and industrialists. Known Historic and/or Archaeological Resources within the City of La Quinta: Most of the cultural resources in the City of La Quinta developed in and around ancient Lake Cahuilla. The oldest cultural resources have been identified in the western portion of the City that date to about 2700 years ago. In 1980, the Riverside County Historical Commission of the Riverside Parks Department conducted a survey to log La Quinta’s historical resources and identified 90 properties of historic importance. In 2006 an update to the City’s historic resources were conducted and identified 183 more buildings. The majority of these buildings are single-family homes older than 80 years. In addition to cultural resources, the City also contains paleontological resources due to the presence of Lake Cahuilla. Freshwater shells from the last stand of the lake in the 17th century have been reported from the City. Results and Summary of Archaeological Fieldwork for Specific Plan: An Isolated Pottery Sherd and the Cremation Remains: As mentioned in the project description, the project site is located within the Jefferson Square Specific Plan which was approved in 2004. At that time, the whole Specific Plan area was undeveloped land. As part of the site investigation, an “Archaeological Monitoring Report” was prepared in 2009 by CRM TECH. According to the results, one cremation remains and an isolated pottery sherd were found within the recorded boundaries of Site 33-001769. After their locations were plotted onto project maps, the cremation remains, and the isolated pottery sherd were appropriately treated and curated at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at the University of California, Riverside. The isolated pottery sherd was discovered outside the boundaries of any previously recorded sites in the vicinity. It was found with no other associated cultural materials and within soils attributed to the last high stand of Lake Cahuilla and more recent dune formations. Also, occurring out of depositional context, an isolate by definition does not constitute an archaeological site, and is not considered a potential “historical resource,” as defined by CEQA. The cremation site was identified on the northern portion of the property, and consisted of an oval- shaped burned spot at the depth of one meter below the original ground surface found in August 2008 during subsurface excavation of a retention basin. In September 2008, archaeological excavation confirmed the presence of possible human bone at that area. Deputy Coroner Deborah Gray visited the site and identified the remains as non-diagnostic femur or tibia fragments of human size (Case# 2008- 063-351). The Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento was also contacted regarding that finding. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -40- On September 10th, 2008, Tribal Elder Joe Benitez of the nearby Cabazon Band of Mission Indians visited the site and performed a ceremony for the remains prior to interment. The remains were reburied at a depth of approximately eight feet below surface, in an area designated for landscaping and outside any building area. Subsequent to the rough grading of the site, pads were created, including the pad site proposed for the hotel site, and all infrastructure within the project was installed. The project archaeologist filed a Monitoring Report, and no further archaeological resources have since been identified on the site. Discussion of Impacts a, b) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated The subject site is partially developed with a parking lot and existing Fresh and Easy store building which were developed in late 2010. That building will be rehabilitated as an indoor organic food and beverage market with dine-in facilities which would involve new interior and exterior retrofits to the existing building. This Phase of the project will also include the filling of the existing retention basin in the northwest corner of the site, and the construction of additional parking spaces. This area was previously excavated and thoroughly studied during site monitoring, and contained no historic resource. That investigation also identified archaeological resources, in the form of a cremation site, which was removed prior to site grading. No other archaeological resources were identified in this portion of the site, and no deeper excavation will be conducted for the proposed project. Therefore, impacts associated with Phase I of the proposed project are expected to be less than significant. Portions of the site will be precise-graded as part of the project during Phase II, for the construction of the hotel. This area was previously graded when the project was initially developed, and no resources were identified. It is possible, however, that excavation for building foundations could result in deeper cut than those that occurred for that portion of the site when the project was initially developed. Because of the location of resources on the project site in the past, over-excavation for the hotel site has the potential to uncover additional resources. The City contacted four tribes (Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians, Aqua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, and Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians) in May 2018 regarding potential Native American Cultural resources on-site. Three representatives (Victoria Martin from Augustine Band, Anthony Madrigal of the Twenty-Nine Palms Band, and Pattie Garcia-Plotkin from Aqua Caliente Band) have responded which are summarized below: •Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians stated that the tribe is unware of specific resources that could be affected by the proposed project. However, the Tribe recommended contacting Native American Tribes and individuals within the immediate vicinity of the subject site that may have any information regarding the area. In addition, the tribe has particularly requested that the applicant be required to monitor, using a qualified Native American monitor, during the pre-construction and construction phase of the project. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -41- •ACBCI stated that the project site is not located within the boundaries of the ACBCI Reservation. However, it lies within the Tribe’s Traditional Use Area. Based on previous survey results, there is a potential for cultural resources to be found at the site, therefore, ACBCI requests the following: oPresence of an approved Cultural Resource Monitor(s) during any ground disturbing activities and a “Mitigation Plan” if buried cultural deposits are encountered. •Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians stated that since the project area was built upon a prehistoric archaeological site, there is an increased chance of exposing sensitive cultural materials for this project. Therefore, the Band requested a detailed grading plan and project design plans to provide any additional recommendations, which were provided to the Tribe in July of 2018. The THPO has also requested a consultation meeting with the City, prior to construction to ensure that known cultural resources would not be impacted. The tribe requested to be notified about all updates and changes within the project moving forward. Summary The project area does not contain any historic resource. However, previous investigations identified archaeological resources at the site, in the form of a cremation site, which was reinterred prior to site grading. The City has conducted SB 18 and AB 52 consultations with the associated tribes to ensure the proper identification of potential “tribal cultural resources.” The project site is within the ACBCI traditional land use area. Due to the traditional land use and cultural ties of the project area, the project site is a sensitive area and potentially contains sub-surface archaeological resources. Therefore, mitigation measures and a monitoring program are included to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels, consistent with the findings of the cultural resource investigation, and the concerns of the Augustine, ACBCI, and Twenty-Nine Palms bands. With implementation of these mitigation measures and a monitoring program, impacts associated with archaeological resources will be reduced to less than significant levels. c) No Impact. The project site occurs within the boundary of ancient Lake Cahuilla. Prior grading of the site, however, resulted in the disturbance of surface soils. No paleontological resources are expected to remain on the project site. No impact will occur. d) Less Than Significant Impact. No cemeteries are known to occur on-site. However, a known interment has occurred in the southwest corner of the site, in an area that was subsequently landscaped. The construction of the hotel will result in the modification of landscaping in this area of the site. However, landscaping activities are not expected to reach the depth of the previous interment. In addition, the over-excavation of the hotel pad will be monitored, assuring that any identification of previously unknown remains will occur. Therefore, less than significant impacts associated with human remains are anticipated. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -42- Mitigation Measures: CUL-1: A qualified archaeologist and Tribal monitor shall be on site during over-excavation of the hotel pad. The archaeologist and monitor shall be empowered to halt activities and redirect them to other areas, if a cultural resource is identified. Any resource identified during these activities shall be appropriately treated and curated. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: CUL-A Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the hotel pad, the applicant shall furnish the City with a fully executed monitoring agreement. Within 30 days of the completion of over- excavation activities on the project site, a report of findings shall be filed with the City. Responsible Parties: Project applicant, project archaeologist, Tribal monitor, Design and Development Department, Public Works Division. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -43- VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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 Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.  ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?  iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?  iv) Landslides?  b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?  c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?  d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?  e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?  Sources: 2035 General Plan; “Geotechnical Engineering Investigation,” prepared by Krazan and Associates, Inc. in May 2007; “Soil Survey of Riverside County, California, Coachella Valley Area,” U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, 1980. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -44- Setting The Coachella Valley is located in the northwestern portion of the Salton Trough, a tectonic depression roughly 130 miles long and 70 miles wide that extends from the San Gorgonio Pass to the Gulf of Mexico. The valley is bounded by the San Bernardino Mountains on the northwest, San Jacinto Mountains on the west, Santa Rosa Mountains on the south, and Little San Bernardino Mountains and Indio Hills on the north. The Salton Sea is located to the southeast. The valley’s geologic composition is directly related to its proximity to the San Andreas Fault, which passes through the northeasterly portion of the valley, and other active faults. The region is susceptible to a range of geologic hazards, including ground rupture, major ground shaking, slope instability, and collapsible and expansive soils. Episodic flooding of major regional drainages, including the Whitewater River, results in the deposition of sand and gravel on the valley floor. Strong sustained winds emanating from the San Gorgonio Pass cause wind erosion and transport and deposit dry, finely granulated, sandy soils on the central valley floor. Regional soils range from rocky outcrops within the mountains bordering the valley to coarse gravels of mountain canyons and recently laid fine- and medium-grained alluvial (stream deposited) and aeolian (wind deposited) sediments on the central valley floor. The project site is located within the Jefferson Square Specific Plan area for which a “Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report,” was prepared by Krazan and Associates, Inc. in 2007 to evaluate subsurface soil and groundwater conditions. The site investigation included literature review, field exploration, sixteen (16) borings to depths of 11 to 51 feet below the ground surface and laboratory testing of the borings. Results of the project site’s assessment are as follows: Soil Profile and Subsurface Conditions: Based on the borings’ profiles, the subsurface soils at the project site consist of 1 to 3 feet of loose/disturbed silty sands and sands underlain by denser alluvial deposits. Laboratory test of the subsurface soil suggested that the deeper soils were moderately strong and slightly compressive. Physical properties of the subsurface soil are reported below: Penetration Resistance = 7 to 54 blows per foot, Dry Densities = 90.8 to 112.6 pounds per cubic feet, Angles of Internal Friction = 32 to 37 degrees, Consolidation when Saturated = 0.7 to 1.7 percent under a 2-ksf load, R-Values = 52 to 58, Maximum Dry Densities = 110 to 119 pcf, and Expansion Index = 0. Currently, the majority of the site is developed. The entire site was graded when construction of the pharmacy, Fresh and Easy store and retail shops was undertaken. At that time, the site proposed for the hotel was also graded, but not constructed. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -45- Groundwater: Groundwater level is an indicator of groundwater availability, groundwater flow, and physical characteristics of an aquifer, which fluctuates due to aquifer storage changes either due to addition or extraction of water from the aquifer both through natural means (e.g. precipitation and climatic conditions) and human involvement (e.g. irrigation practices, flow in adjacent or nearby canals, pumping from wells). In 2007, groundwater was not encountered in borings ranging from 11 to 51 feet in depth at the site. Soil Corrosivity: Soil corrosion is a geologic hazard that affects buried metals and concrete that are in direct contact with soil or bedrock. Chloride content, electrical resistivity, and pH level are the main indicators of the soil’s tendency to corrode ferrous metals. For the project site, the soil corrosivity to the buried structures was also evaluated, and is given below: Parameters Results Test Method Resistivity 12,500 ohms-cm Caltrans Sulfate > 5 mg/kg EPA 9038 Chloride 23.4 mg/kg EPA 9253 pH 9.02 EPA 9045C Chloride and sulfate were reported low to initiate soil corrosion at the site. However, electrical resistivity of onsite soils was reported to have a mild potential for metal loss from the electrochemical corrosion process. Collapsible Soil: The upper onsite soils are reported to be moisture-sensitive and moderately compressible under saturated conditions. In 2007, a number of structures in the project vicinity was reported to experience excessive post-construction settlement as foundations became saturated. The rehabilitation of the existing Fresh and Easy store building and construction of a new hotel building on the subject site will not significantly affect Geology and Soils, as discussed below. Discussion of Impacts a) i) No Impact. The subject property is not located within or adjacent to an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The nearest earthquake fault is the San Andreas Fault (Coachella Section), approximately 3.85 miles northeast of the site. This fault is capable of generating earthquakes of magnitude >5.0, however, fault rupture is not expected on the project site. No impact will result from implementation of the proposed project. ii. Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in a seismically active region where earthquakes originating on local and regional seismic faults can produce severe ground shaking. Buildings proposed for the site will be required to be constructed in accordance with the most Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -46- recent edition of the California Building Code (CBC) and La Quinta Municipal Code Section 8.16.010 (Adoption of the California Existing Building Code) to provide collapse-resistant design. The City has adopted several modifications to the CBC in accordance to local geology. The La Quinta Municipal Code provides regulations for collapse-resistant design. These requirements are designed to minimize the impact to people and property in the event of an earthquake. Project-related impacts associated with seismic ground shaking will be less than significant. iii. No Impact. The project site is located in an area that has a low susceptibility to liquefaction (General Plan; Exhibit IV-3). Onsite underlying soils consist of Myoma fine sand, (MaB) and Myoma fine sand (MaD) of Wind-Laid Dune Sand (Qs) (Appendix B), which would not be susceptible to liquefaction. In addition, the depth of the groundwater in the area is greater than 50 feet below the ground surface. For liquefaction to occur, groundwater levels must be within 50 feet of the ground surface. Therefore, the sand in this region is not prone to consolidation under building loads and severe ground shaking. No impact is anticipated. iv. No Impact. The proposed project site is on the Coachella Valley floor. It consists of, and is surrounded by relatively flat terrain. The nearest hillsides and mountainous slopes are approximately ½ mile west of the property. No impacts associated with landslides will occur. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The Coachella Valley floor on which the subject property is located is highly susceptible to wind erosion (General Plan; Exhibit IV-5). The proposed project will include rehabilitation of the existing Fresh and Easy store building, grading, paving, construction, and other ground disturbance of the vacant pad, and excavation of the retention basin by heavy machinery that could result in the loss of some topsoil and generate particulate matter in the western portion of the site. Grading and construction may require removal of the topsoil; however, project-related impacts are expected to be less than significant because the project will be required to implement measures to control fugitive dust (See Air Quality, Section III), which will minimize potential adverse impacts associated with soil erosion. Water erosion could also occur as a result of site watering and rainfall during the development process and post-construction operations. The project will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) and the Best Management Practices (BMP) set forth in the project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to assure that water erosion is reduced to less than significant levels. Post-construction water runoff will be retained in the retention facilities onsite. These project features will assure that impacts associated with water erosion remain less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. Surface soils of the project site consist of sand, which is not considered an unstable soil or geologic unit. Also, the site is not susceptible to on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse due to the distance from mountainous slopes and foothills and depth of the groundwater. The majority of the site is currently developed as a Fresh and Easy store building, a retention basin, and parking lots. The existing vacant pad will be graded as part of the project to accommodate construction of the proposed hotel building, and grading will be conducted in Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -47- compliance with City standards. For the proposed development, the City may require additional project-specific geotechnical and structural engineering analysis, as necessary, to determine whether additional soil remediation or compaction is required for the proposed hotel building. This standard requirement will be imposed by the City prior to issuance of building permits, and will assure that impacts associated with soils remain less than significant. d) No Impact. Expansive soils typically contain large amounts of clay that expand when water is absorbed and shrink when they dry. As described in Section VI-a.iv, above, the site’s underlying soils consist of Myoma fine sand, (MaB) and Myoma fine sand (MaD), which have a low shrink- swell potential (“Soil Survey of Riverside County, California, Coachella Valley Area,” U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, 1980). Therefore, no impact associated with expansive soils will occur. e) No Impact. The project will connect to the City’s existing sewer system. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are proposed. No adverse impacts will occur. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -48- VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?  b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?  Source: 2035 General Plan; California Global Warming Solutions Act; CalEEMod Version 2016.3.1; La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (2012). Setting The principal Green House Gases (GHGs) include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), Ozone (O3), and water vapor (H2O). Some GHGs, such as CO2, CH4, and N2O, occur naturally and are emitted to the atmosphere through natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO2 and CH4 are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO2 are largely byproducts of fossil fuel combustion, whereas CH4 results mostly from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Man made GHGs, which have a much greater heat-absorption potential than CO2, include fluorinated gases, such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), which are associated with certain industrial products and processes. Greenhouse gas emissions are generated by both moving and stationary sources, including vehicles, the production of electricity and natural gas, water pumping and fertilizers. State law mandates that all cities decrease their greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. In June 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger established California’s GHG emissions reduction targets in Executive Order S-3-05. The Executive Order established the following goals: GHG emissions should be reduced to 2000 levels by 2010; GHG emissions should be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020; and GHG emissions should be reduced to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. In furtherance of the goals established in Executive Order S-3-05, the legislature enacted AB 32 (Núñez and Pavley), the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which Governor Schwarzenegger signed on September 27, 2006. On April 29, 2015, Governor Jerry Brown issued an Executive Order which identified an interim GHG reduction target in support of targets previously identified under S-3-05 and AB 32. Executive Order B-30-15 set an interim target goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 to keep California on its trajectory toward meeting or exceeding the long-term goal of reducing GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan In 2012, the City of La Quinta prepared a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan with its General Plan to set greenhouse reduction goals. The plan includes a comprehensive inventory of greenhouse gas emissions Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -49- generated City-wide along with future greenhouse emission projections, reduction targets, and policies and programs. To meet AB 32 and Executive Order S-3-05 goals, the City’s reduction target is to achieve 1990 level emissions by 2020, and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. The City will also comply with statewide efforts and act locally to monitor, evaluate, and amend local policies and programs in order to achieve mandated emission reductions. The proposed project will be reviewed for consistency with the City’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan and its GHG reduction strategies. GHG Thresholds In November 2009, during SCAQMD GHG working group meetings, SCAQMD staff proposed a variety of thresholds for GHG emissions. However, as of July 2018, the SCAQMD Governing Board has not formally adopted the proposed interim tiered approach for evaluating GHG impacts. Implementation of the proposed rehabilitation of an existing building and development of a new building will have no significant impacts on significant GHG emissions, and is discussed further below. Discussion of Impacts a, b) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project will generate GHG emissions during both construction and operation for both phases. As mentioned in Section III, Air Quality, above, the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2016.3.1 was used to quantify air quality emission projections, including greenhouse gas emissions (Appendix A). Construction related greenhouse gas emissions will be temporary and will end once the project is completed. Operational emissions will occur throughout the life of the project. At buildout, there are five emission source categories that will be contributing either directly or indirectly to operational GHG emissions, including energy/electricity usage, water usage, solid waste disposal, area emissions (pavement and architectural coating off-gassing), and mobile sources. On December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD formally adopted a greenhouse gas significance threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e/yr that only applies to stationary sources for industrial uses where SCAQMD is the lead agency (SCAQMD Resolution No. 08-35). This threshold was adopted based upon an October 2008 staff report and draft interim guidance document1 that also recommended a threshold for all projects using a tiered approach. It was recommended by SCAQMD staff that a project’s greenhouse gas emissions would be considered significant if it could not comply with at least one of the following “tiered” tests: •Tier 1: Is there an applicable exemption? •Tier 2: Is the project compliant with a greenhouse gas reduction plan that is, at a minimum, consistent with the goals of AB 32? •Tier 3: Is the project below an absolute threshold (10,000 MTCO2e/yr for industrial projects; 3,000 MTCO2e/yr for residential and commercial projects)? 1 Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold, prepared by SCAQMD, October 2008. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -50- •Tier 4: Is the project below a (yet to be set) performance threshold? •Tier 5: Would the project achieve a screening level with off-site mitigation? The proposed project is consistent and compliant with Tier 3, in that the project is considered a commercial project with an absolute threshold below 3,000 MTCO2e/yr for commercial projects. Table 4 provides a summary of the projected amortized short-term construction, and annual operational GHG generation associated with the potential buildings on the site. As shown in the table, the proposed project will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for commercial land uses. Table 4 Projected GHG Emissions Summary (Metric Tons) Phase CO2e (MT/YR) Construction 688.50 Operational 2,952.15 SCAQMD Threshold (Commercial) 3,000.00 Emission Source: CalEEMod Version 2016.3.1 It is recognized that GHG impacts are intrinsically cumulative. All components of construction, including equipment, fuels, materials, and management practices, would be subject to current and future SCAQMD rules and regulations related to greenhouse gases. Applicable SCAQMD rules include, but are not limited to, source specific standards that reduce the greenhouse gas content in engines and limit equipment idling durations. Project-related GHG emissions will not exceed established GHG thresholds for construction because there are no such thresholds established. In addition, the project will be subject to requirements set forth in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan and City’s Municipal Code Section 9.100.220 (Operational Standards), which is qualitatively consistent with Statewide goals and policies in place for the reduction of GHG emissions. Operational GHG emissions will be generated by energy/electricity usage, water usage, solid waste disposal, area emissions (pavement and architectural coating off-gassing), and mobile sources. As shown in the table above, operational emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD recommended threshold for commercial projects. In addition, the proposed project’s generation of GHG emissions would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation for the purposes of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gasses. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -51- VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?  b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?  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 it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?  e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?  f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?  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?  Source: 2035 General Plan; California Department of Toxic Substances Control Hazardous Waste; State Water Resources Control Board. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -52- Setting In the City of La Quinta, hazardous materials transport, storage, and use is strictly regulated for large quantity users, such as industrial processing plants and commercial dry cleaners. The City implements the General Plan’s Hazardous and Toxic Materials element through regular consultation with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and Riverside County Department of Environmental Health. The City also monitors and regulates industrial plants and commercial areas through the element’s goals, policies, and programs. The State Water Resources Control Board’s online database (Geo Tracker) indicates that the City of La Quinta contains approximately 22 sites that are either listed or permitted as hazardous material sites under the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The majority of these sites are located along Washington Street, Madison Street, and Avenue 52. According to GeoTracker, there are no permitted underground storage tank (UST) and two LUST Cleanup Sites within 2 miles of the project site. Discussion of Impacts a, b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will result in the rehabilitation of the Fresh and Easy store building and development of a three-story hotel building. Cleaners, solvents, fertilizers and pesticides may be used on-site for routine cleaning and landscaping. However, none of these will be used in sufficient quantities so as to pose a threat to humans or cause a foreseeable chemical release into the environment. The rehabilitation and construction phase would involve the use of heavy equipment, which uses small amounts of oil and fuels and other potential flammable substances. During rehabilitation and construction, equipment would require refueling and minor maintenance on site that could lead to fuel and oil spills. The contractor will be required to identify a staging area for storing materials, and will be subject to State law relating to the handling, storage and use of hazardous materials during construction. The proposed project would not result in a significant risk of explosion or accidental release of hazardous substances, because the cleaners and household chemicals used are not explosive and will not be stored in large quantities. The use and handling of hazardous materials during construction activities and long-term operation of the proposed project would occur in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local laws including California Occupational Health and Safety Administration (CalOSHA) requirements. Impacts would be less than significant. c) No impact. John Glenn Middle and Amelia Earhart Elementary schools are located approximately at 0.4 miles southwest of the project within the Indio City limits. The “First School,” a private pre-school, is located approximately 0.92 miles southwest of the project area. None of these schools are located within ¼ miles of the proposed project. No temporary or long- term adverse impacts to schools or students associ ated with hazardous materials are anticipated because of the distance to the school, and the requirements of law pertaining to the storage and use of hazardous materials on the project site. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -53- d) No Impact. The proposed project site is not included on a list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or environment. e, f) No Impact. The Bermuda Dunes Airport is located approximately 1.10 miles north of the project site. According to the Bermuda Dunes Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (BDALUCP), the subject site is located within Zone E (other airport environs) which comes under the influence of the airport. Since the subject property is within Airport Land Use Compatibility Zone E, the project requires staff-level review and approval by the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The applicant completed the ALUC review and was found to be consistent with the BDALUCP in July of 2018. The project site is currently partially developed and surrounded by residential and commercial developments. At buildout, the proposed project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project and/or airport area. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. g) No Impact. The proposed project will not significantly alter the existing circulation pattern in the project area or adversely impact evacuation plans. The primary transportation access points are on Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, which are part of the City’s established street grid system. Both Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street are major roadways, and will provide access to the site by emergency services, and from the site for evacuation purposed. No impact is anticipated. Proposed parking and circulation plans will be reviewed by the Fire and Police Departments to assure that driveways and roads are adequate for emergency vehicles. The project includes an emergency access driveway around the buildings, to assure that fire trucks can access all portions of the project site. A construction plan will be required by the City to assure that the project does not interfere with emergency access during development. These standard requirements will assure that there will be no impacts associated with emergency response. h) No Impact. The subject property is located in an urban area and surrounded on all sides by development. The nearest wildlands are the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains, approximately 2 miles to the southwest. The project site is not located in a wildland fire hazard zone and is not susceptible to wildfires. Therefore, the proposed project will not expose people or structures to significant risks associated with wildfires. No wildfire related impact is expected. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -54- IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?  b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?  c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?  d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?  e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?  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?  Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -55- 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?  Source: 2035 General Plan; FEMA Flood Insurance Rate FIRM Panel No. 06065C2232G; “Preliminary Hydrological Report for CCD Hotels and Resorts-La Quinta” prepared by DRC Engineering, Inc. February 2018; “Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan” prepared by DRC Engineering, Inc. in March 2018. Setting Domestic Water: The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides domestic water and irrigation water to the City of La Quinta, including the project site. Its primary source of water is groundwater extracted by deep wells from the Whitewater River sub-basin. The water resource consists of a combination of natural runoff, recycled water, imported water, inflows from adjacent basins, and an interlinked system of sub- basins. The Whitewater River sub-basin is also artificially recharged through imported State Water Project Exchange and Colorado River water. There are three recharge facilities in the Valley: one located northwest of Palm Springs, one located southeast of La Quinta in Martinez Canyon and one located in La Quinta, south of Avenue 58 and west of Madison Street. The total storage capacity of the Whitewater River Subbasin is approximately 28.8 million-acre feet and it currently contains approximately 25 million-acre feet. It is capable of meeting the water demands of the Coachella Valley, including the City, for extended normal and drought periods. CVWD’s domestic water system includes 50 wells with an average depth of 900 feet to serve the City and its wider customer base. CVWD has a total of 27 reservoirs, with an average capacity of 1.8 million gallons. Wastewater: CVWD also provides wastewater collection and treatment services to the City of La Quinta. CVWD has two wastewater treatment plants serving the City but only one of the plants, which serve the area north of Miles Avenue, currently has the ability to generate tertiary treated water. That plant has a capacity of 2.5 million gallons per day. Reclaimed water can only be used for irrigation. CVWD continually increases the capacity of its wastewater reclamation facilities by constructing new treatment and aeration ponds, and other structures. CVWD implements all requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board pertaining to water quality and wastewater discharge. Flood Control: The project site is located in the southeastern portion of the Coachella Valley. It has an average rainfall of 3 inches per year. Several watersheds drain the adjoining elevated terrain of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains towards the valley floor. The City is subject to short duration rainfall events Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -56- which can generate significant amounts of surface water. To control the surface runoff during storm events, approximately 6% of open space lands are dedicated for purpose of flood control. These areas are connected to a regional conveyance system within the City, which is managed by the CVWD and include the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (Whitewater River), the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, the All-American Canal, the Upper Bear Creek Drainage System, the Lake Cahuilla Reservoir, and the East La Quinta Channel. Furthermore, the City requires that all development projects within the City contain and control the rainwater that flows through a developed site, generally through the installation of retention basins. The project site and areas surrounding it are subject to City requirements relating to flood control. The City implements standard requirements for the retention of storm flows and participates in the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to protect surface waters from pollution. Development projects must retain the 100-year storm flow on site. Surface Water Quality: The water quality of regional surface waters is largely dependent upon land uses that affect runoff, such as agriculture, urban development, and industrial land uses. Runoff from storm water and agricultural irrigation can transport pollutants that collect on the ground surface and affect water quality of receiving streams, rivers, and channels. In the City of La Quinta, the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel are the major receiving water bodies which drain into the Salton Sea. Discussion of Impacts a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in the Whitewater River watershed. All water providers in the watershed are required to comply with Regional Water Quality Control Board standards for the protection of water quality, including the preparation of site-specific Water Quality Management Plans (WQMP) for surface waters. The CVWD is required to meet water quality requirements in its production and delivery of domestic water. The CVWD is regulated by the State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water (DDW) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and must maintain strict water quality standards in the treatment of effluent. The proposed project will extend an 8-inch sanitary sewer line from the southern portion of the project site to connect to an existing 8-inch line along Jefferson Street. Construction of the extension line will be subject to all CVWD requirements. The proposed project will not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The project will also be required to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations, which minimize the pollutant load associated with urban runoff. The imposition of conditions of approval, local, state and federal standard requirements and the requirements of law will assure that the project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -57- b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will require water for domestic use and landscape irrigation for the retail market and hotel. CVWD has developed demand factors for broad land use categories (i.e. residential, commercial, industrial, schools/institutional, and landscaping irrigation), and does not include specific factors for hotel and retail land uses. Based on a demand factor of 0.11 gallons per square foot per day, provided by American Water Works Association Research Foundation (AWWARF) for retail uses, the retail component of the project has the potential to generate a demand of 3.56 acre-feet per year. Based on the commonly used water demand factor of 150 gallons per day per hotel room for the hotel development, the project has the potential to generate a demand of 29.57 acre-feet per year. Total water demand for the project would be 33.06 acre-feet per year. The proposed project is consistent with the land use designation of the General Plan. CVWD works with the City of La Quinta and all other jurisdictions and regularly updates its Urban Water Management Plan. According to the CVWD’s latest Urban Water Management Plan (2015), the City of La Quinta, including the subject site, was considered in its future water demand projections and analysis, which found that the CVWD has sufficient supply to accommodate growth now and in the future, with the implementation of a number of conservation strategies. Approximately 28.8 million acre-feet of water is stored in the Whitewater River sub-basin and the proposed project's water demand will be less than 1 percent of CVWD's groundwater supplies. Therefore, project impacts associated with domestic water demand are expected to be less than significant. The project will connect to existing water lines beneath Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. No new wells or additional water infrastructure are proposed. The project will be required to comply with the City’s water-efficiency requirements, including the use of drought-tolerant planting materials and limited landscaping irrigation. Implementation of these and other applicable requirements will assure that water-related impacts remain at less than significant levels. c, e) Less Than Significant Impact. The subject site is generally flat and contains no rivers or streams. Previous Approved Hydrological Design for the Specific Plan: The subject site is located within the partly developed Jefferson Square Specific Plan area, for which a “Final Hydrology and Hydraulic Study,” was prepared in 2008. In that report, the site was divided into three distinct drainage areas (i.e. Watershed “A”, “B,” and “C”) that were designed as follows (Exhibit 13): Watershed A: This area was designed to collect runoff from the Jefferson Street parking lot, two out-parcel buildings and Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. The runoff was to be collected by drain inlets and the existing catch basins in the streets. Storm drain pipes then discharge into an existing underground retention and infiltration basin (Basin “A”) located south of Pad A and west of Jefferson Street. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -58- Watershed B: This area was designed to collect the runoff from the major building roofs and the rear drive aisle along the west boundary of the project. The runoff was to be collected by surface flowlines and drain inlets that would discharge into an open retention basin (Basin “B”) located on the west edge of the property behind the Fresh and Easy store. Watershed C: This area was designed to collect the runoff from approximately 1.9 acres along the south boundary of the site and approximately 0.5 acres of street runoff. The runoff was to be collected by surface flowlines and pipe inlets to an existing open retention basin (Basin “C”) located at the southeast corner of the site. The table below summarizes the watersheds acreage and capacities during 10-year and 100-year storm events based on the previously approved hydrological design for the Specific Plan area. Watershed Area (AC) Q10 (CFS) Q100 (CFS) Retention Basin Volume Required (CF) Retention Basin Volume Provided (CF) A 6.9 19.9 34.3 Existing Retention Basin to remain B 3.7 12.2 21.4 27,010 28,031 C 2.5 7.8 13.2 Existing Retention Basin to remain Total 13.0 39.9 68.4 - - Currently, major portions of the Specific Plan are developed and there are three retention basins as planned. The northern portion of the site is developed and the runoff discharges to an existing retention basin (B). To accommodate the runoff from the southern portion of the site which will be built as a hotel, minor changes are proposed, as discussed below. Proposed Changes for Watershed “A”, “B,” and “C”: For the proposed development, the existing open retention basin (Basin “B”) located along the west boundary will be converted to an underground retention facility (Exhibit 13). The proposed facility will be designed to match the capacity of the existing open retention basin requirement at 27,010 CF. The proposed facility will consist of 148 units of 100” x 60” open bottom arch chambers and one existing 30 feet deep Maxwell drywell. The combined volume provided, including gravel layers is 27,184 CF or 101% of the required storage volume. Pretreatment of the runoff before it enters the underground infiltration chamber will be accomplished by an existing hydrodynamic separator manufactured by Hydro International. The 6" gravel layer under the bottom of the underground retention basin will be used for infiltration of runoff into the ground soils. The table below summarizes the watershed’s acreage and capacities during 10-year and 100-year storm events of the watersheds based on the proposed development for subject site. Watershed Area (AC) Q10 (CFS) Q100 (CFS) Retention Basin Volume Required (CF) Retention Basin Volume Provided (CF) A 6.9 20.0 34.3 Existing Retention Basin to remain B 3.7 12.5 21.4 27,010 28,184 C 2.4 7.5 12.8 Existing Retention Basin to remain Total 13.0 40 68.5 - - Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -59- The retention basins and underground facilities will accommodate the 10-year and 100-year storm. Basin “A” and Basin “C,” which were constructed as part of the original Jefferson Square retail center will remain in place and undisturbed. Basin “B” will be converted to an underground retention facility. The proposed project will be required to comply with the City’s requirements as they relate to storm water retention, including the approval of a final project-specific hydrology study and Water Quality Management Plan. Implementation of these and other applicable requirements will assure that drainage and stormwater will not create or contribute water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. f) No Impact. A project specific Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan was prepared for the subject site in 2018 by DRC Engineering, Inc. The proposed project will be required to comply with all applicable water quality standards, and will implement a Water Quality Management Plan approved by the City and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Adherence to the City’s standard requirements related to water quality will ensure there will be no impact to water quality. g, h, i) No Impact. The project site is not located in the 100-year floodplain and will not place housing or other structures in an area that would impede or redirect flows (General Plan; Exhibit IV-6). According to Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the site is located in Zone X, which represents “areas outside of 0.2% annual chance flood.” (FIRM Panel No. 06065C2232G). No impact is anticipated. j) No Impact. The project site is not located in the vicinity of a water body. No hazard from dam failure, tsunami or seiche is possible. There will be no impacts. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. JEFMSON I STMT Irw,20 �.r rFu - . - . -. OI l�I�i �t • �. r v ��•k.. � w:T 4Fif � �■O�+pl 'U %[/` 1ST, rr�i w .�. 1�� M■ WFq �• !A•r-�- }�y mom_ t+] �T M 4 I► 19 Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Exhibit L A TERRA NOVA" Preliminary Hydrology Plan 1 ft,l�s k:.E ,.., " La Quinta. California Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -61- X. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community?  b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?  c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?  Sources: 2035 General Plan; Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) 2003; Figure 4- 1-Conservation Areas; Project materials. Setting The project site is governed by the policies and land use designations of the La Quinta General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Currently, the project area is designated as General Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial (CN) in the City’s General Plan and Zoning Maps, respectively. The project site is also governed by the Jefferson Square Specific Plan, which provides site-specific design standards and guidelines to guide development on the site. The project proposes an amendment to the Specific Plan, as described below. The City of La Quinta participates in the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), as discussed above under Biological Resources. Discussion of Impacts a) No Impact. The subject property is part of a planned commercial development, and is partially developed with retail and commercial land uses. No residences or neighborhoods occur on within the Specific Plan boundary. The proposed development will not physically divide an established community. No impact will occur. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Currently, the Specific Plan area is designated as General Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial (CN) in the City’s General Plan and Zoning Maps, respectively. The Applicant is proposing a Specific Plan Amendment that would result in the rehabilitation of the existing Fresh and Easy store building to an indoor organic food and beverage Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -62- market with dine-in facilities, and the construction of a three-story hotel building. A Site Development Permit is also proposed for approval of the landscaping and architectural design of the hotel and retail components of the project. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is a comprehensive update to the existing Specific Plan that addresses the development of a food market, assorted retail and service-oriented shops, and a 160-room hotel. The Amendment also includes an updated discussion of landscaping, an increase in the allowable floor area ratio (FAR) from 0.25 to 0.30, an enhanced circulation discussion, refinement to the design guidelines and development standards, and new landscape design guidelines. The proposed Amendment will not substantially change or degrade the City’s development standards, nor would it result in the construction of substandard structures. The project uses are generally consistent with the land uses allowed in the City’s commercial zones. The Amendment will allow a hotel in the Neighborhood Commercial zone, which is otherwise not a permitted use, but the relatively small size of the hotel, and its location in close proximity to major roadways and the Interstate result in a compatibility of the site with the use. Overall, the provisions of the Specific Plan and the development of the project are not expected to conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project, and impacts are considered less than significant. c) No Impact. As stated in Section IV, Biological Resources, the project site is located in the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) boundaries, but is not located within or adjacent to a conservation area. The proposed project will be required to comply with its requirements relating to the payment of fees at the issuance of building permits, if these fees were not payed at the time that the original project was constructed. No conservation plan- related conflict will occur. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -63- XI. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?  b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?  Sources: 2035 General Plan. Setting Mineral resources in the City of La Quinta consist primarily of sand and gravel which has been transported by wind and rain into the Valley from surrounding mountains over millennia. The City is composed of seven soil units: alluvial sand and gravel of the Whitewater River (Qg), windblown sand (Qs), interbedded lacustrine (Ql), alluvial deposits (Qa), alluvial fan sand and gravel deposits (Qf), landslide deposits (Qls), and quartz diorite (Qd) (General Plan; Exhibit IV-4). Sand and gravels are considered an economic resource and commonly used for road base and other building materials. Only one area of the City is identified as having the potential for mineral resources, the Quarry. However, the Quarry has been developed as a country club for several years. No existing sand or gravel operations occur in the vicinity of the project site. Discussion of Impacts a, b) No Impact. Mineral resources in the City consist primarily of sand and gravel. The project site is located in Mineral Resource Zone MRZ-3, “areas containing known or inferred mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resources significance” (General Plan; Exhibit III-1). As discussed in Section VI, Geological Resources, the project site is mainly composed of Myoma fine sand, (MaB) and Myoma fine sand (MaD) of Wind-Laid Dune Sand (Qs). Currently, the majority of the site is developed. The remaining undeveloped pads are not considered a source of valuable mineral resources for the region and the residents of the state. Therefore, there will be no impact to mineral resources as a result of the proposed project. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -64- XII. NOISE: Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?  b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?  c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?  d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?  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?  Source: 2035 General Plan; “Jefferson Square Noise Impact Analysis,” prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on April 4, 2018. Setting According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), the main sources of noise include road traffic, aircraft, railroads, construction, industry, noise in buildings, and consumer products (EPA Clean Air Act Title IV - Noise Pollution). In any city, the main sources of traffic noise are the motors and exhaust systems of autos, trucks, buses, and motorcycles (Noise and Its Effects; Administrative Conference of the United States). Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -65- Stationary noise sources include pool and spa equipment or heating, ventilating and conditioning (HVAC) units. Non-transportation-related noise can also come from the stationary operations of transport, such as railroad yards and truck depots used for loading and unloading. Temporary noise sources include landscape maintenance activities, home stereo systems, and barking dogs. The City has the authority to set land use noise standards and place restrictions on private activities that generate excessive or intrusive noise. Noise generators are subject to the City’s noise ordinance. The City of La Quinta has established goals, policies, and programs to limit and reduce the effects of noise intrusion on sensitive land uses and to set acceptable noise levels for varying types of land uses. The project site is located on Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street are designated as “Primary Arterial” and “Major Arterial,” respectively, in the City’s Circulation Element. Noise levels on Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street can be expected to be greater than would be typical of local streets. The Specific Plan area is surrounded by streets on its north and east sides. A park is located to the west, with residential development some distance beyond. Adjacent to the southern portion of the subject site is an existing residential development which is protected by a 6-foot wall at the property boundary line. The residential units within this subdivision, Monticello, are considered sensitive receptors under the City’s noise standards. Discussion of Impacts a, d) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The subject property is currently partially developed. The main noise source in the area is vehicular traffic on the developed portions of the Specific Plan and nearby roadways (Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street). Noise-Sensitive Receptors: Noise-sensitive land uses include those uses wher e noise exposure could result in health-related risks to individuals and places where quiet is an essential element of the intended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern; land uses such as parks, historic sites, cemeteries, and some recreation areas are considered sensitive to increases in exterior noise levels. Hospitals, schools, places of worship, hotels, libraries, and other places where low interior noise levels are essential are noise-sensitive land uses. To estimate the proposed project construction and operational noise impacts, reference noise level measurements were collected at 5 locations on and surrounding the project site. The results of the noise monitoring are shown in Table 5 and the locations of each monitoring site are described below. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -66- Table 5 24-hour Ambient Noise Level Measurements Location1 Distance to Project Boundary (Feet) Description Energy Average Hourly Noise Level (dBA Leq)2 CNEL Daytime Nighttime L1 290' Located west of the Project site and Monticello Park near existing residential homes. 57.1 56.3 63.0 L2 46' Located southwest of the Project site in the Monticello Park adjacent to an existing 6-foot high noise barrier for residential homes. 53.0 52.0 58.7 L3 0' Located within an existing commercial parking lot adjacent to an existing 6- foot high noise barrier for residential homes south of the Project site on Memorial Place. 51.6 50.6 57.5 L4 0' Located adjacent to an existing 6-foot high noise barrier for residential homes south of the Project site, west of Jefferson Street. 60.6 57.4 64.8 L5 120' Located east of the Project site across Jefferson Street, adjacent to an existing 6-foot high noise barrier for residential homes. 68.7 65.3 72.7 1 See Exhibit 5-A for the noise level measurement locations in the Noise Study. As shown in the table above, the highest 24-hour ambient noise level would be higher at locations L1, L4, and L5. L1 and L5 are located west and east of the project, respectively. L4 is located adjacent to an existing 6-foot high noise barrier for residential homes south of the project site. At L4, the hourly noise levels measured ranged from 58.4 to 62.2 dBA Leq during the daytime hours and from 50.6 to 62.9 dBA Leq during the nighttime hours. The energy average daytime noise level was calculated at 60.6 dBA Leq with an average nighttime noise level of 57.4 dBA Leq. To reduce the impact at location L4, further analysis was performed to calculate the potential noise levels during construction and operation of the project and are further discussed below. Short-Term (Construction) Noise: Noise generated by project construction equipment will include a combination of trucks, power tools, concrete mixers, and portable generators that when combined can reach high levels. Temporary noise generated during the construction phase of the proposed project could exceed acceptable noise levels. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -67- The City will require that construction activity comply with Section 6.08.050 of the Municipal Code, which limits construction activity to between 7 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on weekdays and 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. on Saturdays between October 1 and April 30. From May 1st to September 30th, the construction hours are from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays and 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturdays. No activity is permitted on Sundays and holidays. Section 9.100.210 of the City’s Municipal Code governs noise control in the city. The current noise standards allow noise levels of 65 dBA from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. and 50 dBA from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. for noise sensitive uses; 75 dBA from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. and 65 dBA from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. for non-residential uses. Noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment can range from approximately 68 dBA to in excess of 80 dBA at a distance of 50 feet. Noise levels from construction equipment can be expected to lessen by 6 dBA for each doubling of distance. The noise analysis prepared for the proposed project first considered whether the project noise levels would exceed the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) standards for construction noise standards. Those standards consider a noise level in excess of 85 dBA Leq for a period of eight hours a day. The noise analysis considered all phases of construction, including demolition, grading and excavation and paving of the project improvements, and considered the noise levels that can be anticipated at each of the noise monitoring locations. The results of that analysis are shown in Table 6. Please see Exhibit 15 and 16 for the noise measurement and receiver locations. Table 6 Unmitigated Construction Equipment Noise Level Summary (dBA Leq) Receiver Location Construction Phase Hourly Noise Level (dBA Leq) Demolition Grading/ Excavation Paving Highest Levels R1 44.6 53.4 48.0 53.4 R2 46.7 55.6 50.2 55.6 R3 56.1 64.9 59.5 64.9 R4 58.7 67.5 62.1 67.5 R5 58.7 67.5 62.1 67.5 R6 53.5 62.3 56.9 62.3 R7 43.8 52.6 47.2 52.6 As shown in the table above, construction activities will not exceed the NIOSH standard. However, the noise analysis also considered construction noise when added to the ambient noise environment of the receiver locations, and found, as shown in Table 7, that Caltrans noise standards would be exceeded at three locations on the south boundary of the project – two locations in Monticello, and one location at a residential unit on the east side of Jefferson Street. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -68- Table 7 Unmitigated Construction Temporary Noise Level Increases (dBA Leq) Receiver Location Highest Project Construction Noise Level Measurement Location Reference Ambient Noise Levels Combined Project and Ambient Temporary Worst-Case Project Contribution Threshold Exceeded? R1 53.4 L1 57.1 58.6 1.5 No R2 55.6 L1 57.1 59.4 2.3 No R3 64.9 L2 53.0 65.2 12.2 Yes R4 67.5 L3 51.6 67.6 16.0 Yes R5 67.5 L3 51.6 67.6 16.0 Yes R6 67.5 L4 60.6 68.3 7.7 No R7 52.6 L5 68.7 68.8 0.1 No Noise levels at these three locations will increase during construction by 12 to 16 dBA, which is considered a potentially significant impact based on Caltrans’ substantial noise level increase criteria. To reduce construction noise during the daytime at the site, mitigation measures are added at the end of this section. With implementation of the mitigation measures, the noise level at receivers R3, R4, and R5 will be reduced as shown below (Table 8). Table 8 Mitigated Construction Temporary Noise Level Increases at Receivers R3, R4, and R5 (dBA Leq) Receiver Location1 Mitigated Highest Project Construction Noise Level2 Measurement Location3 Reference Ambient Noise Levels4 Combined Project and Ambient5 Temporary Worst-Case Project Contribution6 Threshold Exceeded?7 R3 59.8 L2 53.0 60.6 7.6 No R4 62.5 L3 51.6 62.8 11.2 No R5 62.5 L3 51.6 62.8 11.2 No As described above, with the implementation of mitigation measures, noise levels at all receiver locations will be below Caltrans’ 12 dBA significant temporary impact, and will therefore be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Groundborne vibration would produce groundborne noise which is a rumbling sound. During construction of the proposed project, ground-borne vibration and/or ground-borne noise would be generated, which could be felt by adjacent land uses. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -69- Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type. It is expected that ground-borne vibration from project construction activities would cause only intermittent, localized intrusion due to heavy construction equipment and trucks. The City does not have a construction vibration standard, so the County of Riverside’s standard was used in the noise impact analysis. Based on the County of Riverside vibration standards, the proposed project construction activities will exceed the vibration standard of 0.01 in/sec Root-Mean-Square (RMS) at two of the nearby sensitive receiver locations (R3 and R4) during project construction, which will be mainly due to loaded trucks, auger drills, and large bulldozer operation at 78 feet from the sensitive receiver locations south of project construction activities. In order to mitigate the impact, mitigation measures are provided below that prohibit the use of loaded trucks, auger drills and large bulldozers within 90 feet of the residences at Monticello. With implementation of mitigation, vibration impacts will be below the maximum impact standard, and will be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. As described above, at build out, the primary permanent noise sources will be vehicles traveling to and from the site, HVAC units, and grounds maintenance equipment. The proposed project is not expected to result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Project- related vehicles will be consistent with vehicles already using area roadways. The potential operational noise impacts due to the project’s stationary noise sources on off-site sensitive receiver locations were measured at five locations. The maximum measured operational noise could reach up to 56.6 dBA at any time at the source. Results show that noise levels associated with the roof-top air conditioning units, shopping cart corrals, truck loading and unloading activities, parking lot vehicle movements, and hotel roof-top special event activities are expected to range from 42.8 to 49.2 dBA L50 at the sensitive off-site receiver locations, which are located at the backyards of residential units to the south, behind their 6-foot masonry walls. The City of La Quinta requires that exterior noise levels not exceed 65 dBA CNEL in outdoor living areas, and interior noise levels not exceed 45 dBA CNEL in all habitable rooms for residential uses. Potential impacts from the project’s traffic and operational activities would be less than 65 dBA. Therefore, exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies will be less than significant after build out of the proposed development. e, f) No Impact. The Bermuda Dunes Airport is located approximately 1.10 miles north of the subject property and its noise contours are localized, and not located in the vicinity of the proposed project site. No impacts will occur. Mitigation Measures: NOI-1: Install a minimum 10-foot high temporary construction noise barrier at the Project’s southern site boundary adjacent to sensitive receiver locations R3 to R5 (residential homes), shown on Exhibit ES-A of the noise impact analysis, for the duration of project construction. The noise control barriers must have a solid face from top to bottom. The noise control barriers must meet the minimum height and be constructed as follows: Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -70- oThe temporary noise barriers shall provide a minimum transmission loss of 20 dBA (Federal Highway Administration, Noise Barrier Design Handbook). The noise barrier shall be constructed using an acoustical blanket (e.g. vinyl acoustic curtains or quilted blankets) attached to the construction site perimeter fence or equivalent temporary fence posts. oThe noise barrier must be maintained, and any damage promptly repaired. Gaps, holes, or weaknesses in the barrier or openings between the barrier and the ground shall be promptly repaired. oThe noise control barrier and associated elements shall be completely removed, and the site appropriately restored upon the conclusion of the construction activity. NOI-2 The use of auger drills, loaded trucks, and large bulldozers capable of generating vibration levels of 0.01 in/sec RMS at sensitive receiver locations shall be prohibited within 90 feet of nearby occupied sensitive uses to reduce the noise and vibration levels for the entire duration of project construction. If the contractor can demonstrate that specific pieces of large construction equipment will generate vibration levels at adjacent sensitive uses which remain below 0.01 in/sec RMS, then they shall be allowed to operate within the buffer zone shown on Exhibit ES-A of the noise impact analysis. Otherwise, smaller, rubber-tired, or alternative, lower vibration-generating equipment shall be used within the 90-foot buffer. NOI-3 Prior to approval of grading plans and/or issuance of building permits, plans shall include a note indicating that noise-generating project construction activities shall only occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Mondays to Fridays during the months of October to April, and to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mondays to Fridays during the months of May to September. All year, construction activities are limited to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays. The Project construction supervisor shall ensure compliance with the note and the City shall conduct periodic inspection at its discretion. NOI-4 All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers’ standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the Project site. NOI-5 All equipment staging shall be placed in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receivers nearest the project site during all project construction (i.e., to the center). NOI-6 Construction haul truck deliveries shall be limited to the same hours specified for construction equipment (between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Mondays to Fridays during the months of October to April, and to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mondays to Fridays during the months of May to September. All year, construction activities are limited to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays (4)). The contractor shall design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery truck-related noise. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -71- Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: NOI-A A properly designed temporary noise barrier shall be shown on all construction plans, including building and grading plans. The City shall inspect the installation of the temporary barrier prior to the initiation of construction activities. Responsible Party: Project architect, engineer and contractor, Building Division NOI-B All construction plans, including grading and building plan shall include a note clearly stating that heavy equipment will not operate within 90 feet of the southern property line. The City will periodically inspect the construction site to ensure compliance. Responsible Party: Project architect, engineer and contractor, Building Division NOI-C The project contractor will submit a construction staging plan to the City, and receive approval for that plan, prior to the issuance of any permit on the site. The plan shall include the location of all staging areas, access and haul routes, location of fixed equipment, etc. The City shall periodically inspect the construction site to ensure compliance. Responsible Party: Project contractor, Building Division FRO WAA?PUG OR INDEPfNDF W4Y LEGEND - Noise Measurement Locations SULACO; U[ban Crossroads. 2018 L j TERRA NOVA rLa:%MhGB RCSC+PCII iVG �xts[tng PhRmr{�Cy �S� F,UFWFC FR[SfIF �PC[R,li IISC � 'II 3 Owtv.' t CnMragl +>' awl Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Noise Measurement Locations La QuintaE, California ELS}irF� Ne[a�1 Uses Exhibit RANUOLMO CT HEMMINGS WAY w Z LEGEND. FRED WARING 09 MM 0 Oo�.•��J sadm: FCA IN '� Arroii$Kh h:W. Receiver Locations [6]' Existirtig Barrier Height (in feet) • Di51anCo from feceiver to Project Site boundary (ire I Existing Barrier Sadurco= Urban Crossroads. 2018 Exhibit F, ' Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment L j TERRA NOVA Receiver Lacatlons 1 rL&NMhGB R[SL+PCII iVZ La Quinta, California Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -74- XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?  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?  Source: 2035 General Plan; California Department of Finance - Report E-1 - Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State January 1, 2016 and 2017. Setting In 2017, the City of La Quinta had a population of 40,677, which was an increase of 1.2% from 2016. The City is composed of three basic types of housing units: single family units, multifamily, and mobile homes, but the majority (90.9%) of housing units are single-family homes (General Plan; Table II-30). The Specific Plan Amendment and Site Development Permit will have no impact on Population and Housing. Ultimate development of the site will result in the rehabilitation of the existing Fresh and Easy store building and construction of a hotel building that would not induce permanent population. The impacts of the project are discussed below. Discussion of Impacts a) Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed project is expected to occur over a 1-year period. Construction labor is expected to be derived from the local work force within the Coachella Valley, with the potential for supplemental workers from the greater Riverside County area. Project construction is not expected to induce permanent population growth. At build out, the project will include an indoor organic food and beverage market with dine-in facilities and a hotel which will consist of temporary visitors and guests and will not result in an increase to the permanent population. In addition, the future employees of the development will likely be derived from the local work force as the city continues to grow, and will not attract a substantial number of new residents to the area. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -75- Since existing streets, utilities and public facilities are located adjacent to the project site along Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, the project will not result in the construction or expansion of new infrastructure. Overall, less than significant impacts are anticipated. b, c) No Impact. The subject property is partially developed with commercial uses, and is planned for commercial uses. Therefore, neither construction nor operation of the proposed project would displace housing units or people. There will also not be a need to construct additional housing since, as explained above, the workforce is expected to be largely local. No impacts will occur. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -76- XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:  Fire protection?  Police protection?  Schools?  Parks?  Other public facilities?  Source: 2035 General Plan; Google Earth Pro 7.3.1.4507; Accessed in April 2018. Setting Fire Protection: The City contracts with Riverside County Fire Department for its local service. The nearest fire station is Riverside County Fire Station 93 at 44555 Adams Street, approximately 0.95 mile southwest of the project site. The City of La Quinta has two more fire stations (station# 52 and 70) located at 78111 Avenue 52 and 54001 Madison Street. Fire services in La Quinta are based on delivering a minimum of 3 personnel in the response time standard of 5 minutes or less 90% of the time. Police Protection: The City of La Quinta contracts with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department for police protection services. The City is served by the police station located in Thermal at 86-625 Airport Blvd. The police department consists of 51 sworn officers and 5 community service officers. The average response time for the highest priority emergency calls is 5 minutes. Schools: The City of La Quinta is located within the boundaries of two school districts: Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) and Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD). Families located west of Jefferson Street and north of Avenue 48 are served by DSUSD. CVUSD serves families located east of Jefferson Street and south of Avenue 48. The project site is located within the boundaries of DSUSD. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -77- John Glenn Middle and Amelia Earhart Elementary schools are located approximately 0.4 miles southwest of the project within the Indio City limits. The “First School,” a private pre-school, is located approximately 0.92 miles southwest of the project area. Parks: In the City of La Quinta, a total of 5,259.2 acres are dedicated for open space/ recreation (General Plan Table II-3), which includes golf courses and 72 acres of parks. The three types of parks serving the La Quinta area are community, neighborhood, and mini/pocket parks. The nearest parks to the project site are Monticello Park and La Quinta Park, approximately 0.01 and 1.00 miles west and southwest. Discussion of Impacts a) Fire Protection: Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will increase the demand for fire services in the City as the retail market and hotel will attract additional temporary visitors and guests to the area. The project proponent will be required to pay the City’s development impact fees for fire facilities and apparatus. This fee is designed to allow new development to pay its fair share of future facilities. The project will also generate property tax, sales tax and transient occupancy tax that will offset costs associated with fire protection within the project. The Fire Department will review the project site plan to ensure it meets applicable fire standards and regulations. No construction of new or expanded fire services or facilities are required for the proposed project. Project-related fire protection impacts will be less than significant. Police Protection: Less than Significant Impact. The ultimate development of the site will result in a marginal increase in demand for police services. Police pers onnel will be able to access the site using Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. The project will be required to comply with all Police Department regulations and procedures. The project will generate property tax, sales tax and transient occupancy tax that will offset costs associated with police protection within the project. Project related impacts are expected to be less than significant. Schools: Less Than Significant Impact. The retail market and a hotel as part of the proposed project will not generate permanent population and, therefore, will have no impact on schools. However, the proposed project will be required to pay the state-mandated school fees in place at the time that development occurs. These fees are designed to mitigate impacts to schools by providing funds for the construction of new facilities. Developer impact fees will be charged based on the current DSUSD developer impact fee of $0.56 per square foot for commercial development. These fees are designed to mitigate impacts to schools. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -78- Parks: Less Than Significant Impact. The City has designated approximately 5,259.2 acres for open space/ recreation, including golf courses and 72 acres of parks. The nearest parks to the project site are Monticello Park and La Quinta Park, approximately 0.01 and 1.00 miles west and southwest. The visitors and the guests staying at the proposed project may increase the usage of public and regional parks, occasionally; however, the increase is not expected to be substantial or result in the need for new or expanded public parks. The hotel component of the project includes a central recreational area, including a pool, which will provide recreation opportunities for guests. Increase in demand for the city’s existing facilities will be less than significant. Other public facilities: Less Than Significant Impact. No additional public facilities are required for the proposed project to accommodate visitors or guests. Occasional increases to the demand for existing city facilities will be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -79- XV. RECREATION: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?  b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?  Source: 2035 General Plan. Setting Within the City of La Quinta, there are several mini, neighborhood, community, city and school parks, the Civic Center Campus, nature preserve areas, one community center, a Community Health and Wellness Center, a museum, and golf courses. Discussion of Impacts a, b) No Impact. Residents of La Quinta currently have access to 72 acres of parks, 147 acres of nature preserves containing recreational parkland areas, 845 acres of regional parks, a 525-acre municipal golf course, and numerous other private and public recreational facilities. The City General Plan sets a requirement for providing a minimum of 5 acres of park land per 1,000 residents. When this standard is applied to the estimated General Plan buildout population, a total of 403 acres of neighborhood and community parks will be required to adequately serve the City. The proposed project would generate temporary visitors to the retail market and hotel who can be expected to utilize onsite recreational amenities as well as local and regional recreational facilities. However, that usage will be temporary and will not induce substantial population growth that would result in significant impacts to existing parks or recreational facilities. The proposed development will not induce substantial population growth that would result in significant impacts such as physical deterioration or construction of new recreational facilities to existing parks or recreational facilities. No impact is anticipated. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -80- XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?  b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?  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) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?  e) Result in inadequate emergency access?  f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?  Source: 2035 General Plan; “Focused Traffic Impact Study for the Jefferson Square Shopping Center,” prepared by Clyde E. Sweet and Associates in May 2008; “Trip Generation Memo,” prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., in January 2008; “Jefferson Square Trip Generation Assessment,” prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., in March 2018. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -81- Setting The project site is located at the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. Access to the project site will be provided through four existing driveways on Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street which can also be used for the emergency access. Both Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street are three lanes in each direction and are designated Major Arterial roadways in the City’s Circulation Element. The traffic is controlled by a traffic signal at Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. The City has established a goal for Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street intersection operations of Level of Service (LOS) D or better, and roadway link segment operations of LOS C or better. In 2008, the subject site was analyzed for 16,500 square feet of retail, 13,928 square feet of supermarket uses, a 42,500 square foot hardware store, a 4,500 square foot drive thru bank, and a 13,013 square foot pharmacy/drug store. The project is currently proposing to replace the retail uses (68,021 square feet) previously planned for Parcel 6 with a hotel. To better analyze the impacts, the trip generation of the proposed project was compared against the previous and City’s General Plan land uses, as discussed below. Discussion of Impacts a, b) Less Than Significant Impact. Urban Crossroads, Inc. and Clyde E. Sweet and Associates prepared traffic impact analyses for the Jefferson Square Specific Plan in 2008. Both those analyses found that traffic impacts of the then-proposed project were less than significant, and no mitigation measures were proposed. In order to assess the current project, Urban Crossroads prepared a “Jefferson Square Trip Generation Assessment” to consider the proposed amendments to the Specific Plan. The updated assessment was based upon a variety of sources, including the General Plan Circulation Element and the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ 10th Edition Trip Generation Manual (2017). The Land Use Codes used for the project trip generation analysis are No. 310 (hotel), 820 (shopping center), 850 (supermarket), and 881 (pharmacy/drugstore with drive through), which describe the proposed and existing development within the Specific Plan. Project Site Trip Generation: The project site is located at the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street where the traffic is both attracted to and produced by development. Therefore, the trip generation was calculated based on the proposed development for the subject site, existing pharmacy/retail and the future retail pads in the Specific Plan area, as shown in Tables 9 and 10. Table 9 provides the ITE trip generation rates for each type of land use. Table 10 assigns these trip generation rates to the proposed project, the existing development in the Specific Plan area, and the future planned development in the Specific Plan area. Table 10 shows that the Jefferson Square project will generate 5,500 daily trips. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -82- Table 9 Project Trip Generation Rates Land Use* ITE LU Code Units** Peak Hour Daily Morning Evening Inbound Outbound Total Inbound Outbound Total Hotel 310 RM 0.28 0.19 0.47 0.31 0.29 0.60 8.36 Shopping Center (Average Rate) 820 TSF 0.58 0.36 0.94 1.83 1.98 3.81 37.75 Shopping Center (Equation)*** 820 TSF 1.26 0.77 2.03 2.62 2.83 5.45 60.35 Supermarket 850 TSF 2.29 1.53 3.82 4.71 4.53 9.24 106.78 Pharmacy/Drug store with Drive- Through 881 TSF 2.04 1.80 3.84 5.15 5.14 10.29 109.16 * Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). ** TSF = Thousand Square Feet; VFP = Vehicle Fuelling Positions *** Rates calculated based on ITE equations for LUC 820 for 98,803 sf Shopping Center Table 10 Project Trip Generation Summary Land Use* Quantity Units** Peak Hour Daily Morning Evening Inbound Outbound Total Inbound Outbound Total Proposed Project Hotel 162 RM 45 31 76 50 48 98 1,354 Retail 8.84 TSF 5 3 8 16 18 34 334 Food Market 16.56 TSF 38 25 63 78 75 153 1,769 Proposed Project Sub- Total 88 59 147 144 141 285 3,457 Existing Buildings Retail 7 TSF 4 3 7 13 14 27 264 Pharmacy/Dru gstore with Drive- Through 13.01 TSF 27 23 50 67 67 134 1,420 Existing Retail Sub- Total 31 26 57 80 81 161 1,684 Future Retail Pads Retail 9.50 TSF 6 3 9 17 19 36 359 Future Retail Pads Sub- Total 6 3 9 17 19 36 359 Total Site Trips 125 88 213 241 241 482 5,500 * Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). ** TSF = Thousand Square Feet; VFP = Vehicle Fuelling Positions Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -83- The project site is designated as General Commercial in the City’s Land Use Map. Per the General Plan, commercial land uses have a floor-area ratio (FAR) of 0.22. Based on 10.31 acres for the site, the quantity used for analysis was 98,803 square feet. As shown in the Table 11, the development of the proposed project is anticipated to generate 463 fewer trip-ends per day with 13 more AM peak hour trips and 57 fewer PM peak hour trips as compared to the land use currently adopted in the City of La Quinta General Plan. Table 11 General Plan Trip Generation Comparison Land Use* Quantity Units** Peak Hour Daily Morning Evening Inbound Outbound Total Inbound Outbound Total General Commercial 98.80 TSF 124 76 200 259 280 539 5,963 Proposed Project*** 125 88 213 241 241 482 5,500 Variance 1 12 13 -18 -39 -57 -463 * Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). ** TSF = Thousand Square Feet; VFP = Vehicle Fuelling Positions *** Rates calculated based on ITE equations for LUC 820 for 98,803 sf Shopping Center Trip Generation Comparison to Previously Approved Project: Proposed Development Vs 2008 Urban Crossroads Trip Generation Memo: The project considered by Urban Crossroads in 2008 consisted of a total of 90,441 square feet, including 16,500 square feet of general retail shops, 13,928 square feet of supermarket, 42,500 square feet of hardware store space, a 4,500 square foot drive-through bank and a 13,013 square foot drug store. That project would have generated 7,961 daily trips. As shown in Table 12, the development of the proposed project is anticipated to generate 2,461 fewer trip-ends per day with 22 fewer AM peak hour trips and 376 fewer PM peak hour trips as compared to the 2008 Urban Crossroads Trip Generation Memo. Proposed Development Vs 2008 Clyde Sweet Focused Traffic Study: As shown in Table 12, the development of the proposed project is anticipated to generate 1,616 more trip-ends per day with 66 more AM peak hour trips and 103 fewer PM peak hour trips as compared to the 2008 Clyde Sweet Focused Traffic study. That analysis considered 90,441 square feet of undefined “shopping center” space on the project site. Table 12 Trip Generation Comparison with Previous Studies Site Occupant Weekday AM PM Daily Urban Crossroads Trip Generation Memo* 235 858 7,961 Proposed Project 213 482 5,500 Variance -22 -376 -2,461 Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -84- Site Occupant Weekday AM PM Daily Clyde Sweet Focused Traffic Study 147 585 3,884 Proposed Project** 213 482 5,500 Variance 66 -103 1,616 * Jefferson Square Trip Generation Comparison (January 24, 2008, prepared by Urban crossroads, Inc.) ** Focused Traffic Impact Study For The Jefferson Square Shopping Center (May 2008, Clyde, Sweet & Associates) Additional analysis was conducted to consider specific impacts on the intersection of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, as well as project driveways and both Fred Waring and Jefferson2. This analysis considered operations during the evening peak hour on weekdays, as well as the mid-day peak hour on Saturdays, in order to analyze the two heaviest traffic periods for the area. As shown in Table 13, all analyzed locations will operate at better than acceptable levels in 2020, the project’s anticipated opening year. Table 13 Intersection Operations, Year 2020 Intersection Traffic Control2 Existing (2018) EAP (2020) Acceptable LOS Delay 1 (secs.) LOS Delay 1 (secs.) LOS PM SAT PM SAT PM SAT PM SAT Dwy. 1 & Fred Waring Dr. Jefferson St. & Fred Waring Dr. Shopping Center Dwy. & Fred Waring Dr. CSS TS TS 15.9 25.8 9.0 11.1 21.1 8.6 C C A B C A 18.3 27.8 9.0 12.0 22.1 8.6 C C A B C A E D D Overall, the proposed project will generate fewer trips as compared to General Plan Land Use. Therefore, the impact would also be less than what was analyzed in the General Plan. Neither previous analysis in 2008 identified any impact from the proposed project, and the General Plan EIR determined that roadway segments on Fred Waring and Jefferson Street would operate at acceptable levels at General Plan buildout. The EIR further found that the intersection of Fred Waring and Jefferson Street will operate at an acceptable LOS D at General Plan buildout, and that the intersection of Dune Palms and Fred Waring will operate at LOS C. The proposed project will generate fewer trips than was analyzed in the General Plan EIR, which found that LOS on adjacent roadways would be acceptable at buildout. Therefore, the proposed project, and build out of the remaining pads on the site, will result in acceptable LOS, and impacts will be less than significant. c) No Impact. The Bermuda Dunes Airport is located approximately 1.10 miles north of the subject property. The development of the proposed project will have no impact on the facilities or operations of regional airports, and will not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including an increase in traffic levels. It will also not create substantial safety risks. No project related impact is anticipated. 2 Focused Traffic Assessment Letter dated July 24, 2018, prepared by Urban Crossroads (please see Appendix G). Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -85- d) No Impact. The project will be developed in accordance with City design guidelines and will not increase hazards due to a design feature. The project’s access points have been designed with adequate sight distances, and no change is proposed to these access points. No impact is anticipated. e) No Impact. The project site is proposed to have access to Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street which are both part of the City’s existing street grid system. Regional access to the project site will be provided via major arterials, secondary arterials and a variety of local roads. The proposed project includes an emergency access drive that will allow access to all sides of the buildings for emergency vehicles. Prior to construction, both the Fire Department and Police Department will review the project site plan to ensure safety measures are addressed, including emergency access. The proposed project will not result in inadequate emergency access. No impact is anticipated. f) No Impact. Based on the Active Transportation Plan, prepared by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), bike lanes do exist along both Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. Additional facilities (e.g. NEV lanes and multipurpose path) are also proposed along both Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street in CVAG’s Active Transportation Plan. SunLine Transit Agency provides bus transit services to the Coachella Valley, including the City of La Quinta. The project area is currently served by SunLine along Fred Warding Drive. The closest bus stops are #249 (westbound) and #262 (eastbound) on Fred Waring Drive. There is no bus service along Jefferson Street. Therefore, future residents, guest and/or visitors, and employees would have access to SunLine bus service close to the project site. The proposed project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. No project related impact is anticipated. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -86- XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or  b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.  Source: 2035 General Plan; County of Riverside General Plan (2014); “Archaeological Monitoring Report for Jefferson Square Project,” prepared by CRM TECH in 2009. Setting Around 1000 BC, the City of La Quinta was home to the Cahuilla Indian tribe that lived around Lake Cahuilla for centuries. The Cahuilla Indians were hunters and gatherers and one of the few Native American tribes that dug water wells. Most of the cultural resources in the City of La Quinta developed in and around the ancient Lake Cahuilla. The oldest cultural resources have been identified from the western portion of the City and date back about 2700 years. The descendants of the Pass and Desert Cahuilla still exist in the region and are now associated with several local reservations, such as Torres Martinez, Cabazon, and Augustine to the east and south of the City, and the Agua Caliente and Morongo to the west. None of the tribal reservations are in the City’s boundaries. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -87- Discussion of Impacts a, b) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section V, Cultural Resources, a human cremation site and an isolated pottery sherd were found within the Specific Plan site in 2008 and 2009. On September 10th, 2008, the human remains were reburied in the southwest corner of the project area at a depth of approximately eight feet below surface. The isolated pottery sherd was removed prior to site grading and curated at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at the University of California, Riverside. Multiple archaeological resources had been found on the site, which do not demonstrate the potential for important archaeological data for the study of regional prehistory, and do not appear eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. Their presence, however, suggests the possibility that additional artifacts of unknown quantity and quality could be found during grading. Over-excavation for the hotel site has the potential to uncover additional resources. Therefore, the City has conducted SB 18 and AB 52 consultations with the associated tribes to ensure the proper identification of potential “tribal cultural resources.” See Section V, Cultural Resources, for more detail. Based on the tribes’ responses, the project site is within the ACBCI traditional land use area, therefore, it is a sensitive area and potentially contains sub-surface archaeological resources. Therefore, mitigation measures and a monitoring program are included in Section V to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels, consistent with the findings of the cultural resource investigation, and the concerns of the Augustine, ACBCI, and Twenty-Nine Palms bands. With implementation of these mitigation measures and a monitoring program, impacts associated with archaeological resources will be reduced to less than significant levels. Mitigation measures: See Section V, Cultural Resources. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: See Section V, Cultural Resources. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -88- XVIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?  b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?  c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?  d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?  e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?  f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?  g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?  Source: 2035 General Plan; http://www.cvwd.org/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/511, accessed in April 2018; CVWD’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -89- Setting Wastewater Treatment Currently, the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) has two wastewater treatment plants serving the City of La Quinta and surrounding areas. One wastewater treatment plant is the WRP-7 located at Madison Street and Avenue 38, and the other one is the Mid-Valley Water Reclamation Plant located northwest of the City. The plant capacity of WRP-7 and Mid-Valley Water Reclamation Plant are 5 and 9.5 million gallons per day, respectively. CVWD continually increases the capacity of its wastewater reclamation facilities by constructing new treatment ponds, aeration, and other structures throughout the Coachella Valley. CVWD implements all requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board pertaining to water quality and wastewater discharge. Domestic Water The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides domestic water to the project area. Its primary source of water is groundwater extracted by deep wells from the Whitewater River sub-basin. CVWD’s service area lies in the Whitewater River Watershed. CVWD, as an urban water supplier, is required to prepare an “Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP)” every five years in response to the requirements of the Urban Water Management Planning Act (UWMP Act), California Water Code Sections 10610 through 10656. CVWD’s UWMP is a planning tool that documents actions in support of long-term water resources planning and ensures adequate water supplies are available to meet existing and future urban water demands. In addition to its UWMP, CVWD prepares an annual report each year to document and analyze the region’s water needs and long-term demand for domestic water. This analysis includes conservation measures and replenishment programs to make it possible for CVWD to meet increasing demand of the services area. The proposed project will be required to implement all water conservation measures imposed by CVWD under both normal and drought conditions over the life of the project. The proposed project will tie into existing domestic water lines in Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. No new wells or additional water infrastructure or entitlements will be required. Storm Water Management Storm water drainage infrastructure within the City of La Quinta consists of a network of regional and local drainage systems which are ultimately interrelated. The regional and local drainage system includes natural and improved streams, storm drains, storm channels, and catch basins intended to manage stormwater that flows into the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel. The Coachella Valley Water District and the City of La Quinta control this drainage system. In 2009, the “La Quinta Master Drainage Plan” was prepared to better manage the storm water runoff in the City. The City of La Quinta utilizes detention and retention basins to temporarily contain runoff from sources such as stormwater and landscape irrigation allowing them to either evaporate or percolate into the subsurface. The City requires new developments to have sufficient sized basins to manage surface water flows. New developments are required to utilize an infiltration rate of 0.6 ft/day. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -90- A “Preliminary Hydrology Report” was originally prepared for the Specific Plan in 2008, which has been modified to address the requirements of the proposed project. To accommodate the on-site runoff of a 100-year storm, three on-site retention facilities are proposed which are located near the eastern, northwestern, and southern portions of the Specific Plan area. Solid Waste Solid waste disposal is provided in the City by Burrtec Waste and Recycling Services, LLC under a franchise agreement with the City. Burrtec collects solid waste and transports it to the Edom Hill Transfer Station, located in the City of Cathedral City. From the transfer station, waste will be further transferred to one of the three regional landfills: Lamb Canyon, Badlands, or El Sobrante. The County of Riverside operates all these landfills. Discussion of Impacts a, e) Less Than Significant Impact. The CVWD treats and recycles wastewater at two wastewater treatment plants (WRP-7 and Mid-Valley Water Reclamation Plant) for the City of La Quinta and surrounding areas. These two plants have a total capacity of 14.5 million gallons per day. CVWD continually increases the capacity of its wastewater reclamation facilities by constructing new treatment ponds, aeration, and other structures throughout the Coachella Valley. CVWD implements all requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board pertaining to water quality and wastewater discharge. CVWD is responsible for removing contaminants from wastewater. These contaminants include physical, chemical and biological materials. Sewage generated north of Miles Avenue, in the northern part of the City, is conveyed to WRP-7 located at Madison Street and Avenue 38, northeast of the City. For all land in the City and areas located south of Miles Avenue, sewage is treated at the Mid-Valley Water Reclamation Plant, located northwest of the City, which has a capacity of 9.5 million gallons per day. CVWD also owns and operates the sewer conveyance systems anchored by a system of pipe lines ranging in size from 4 to 24 inches, including 18-inch force main in Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Madison Street, Avenue 50, Avenue 58, and Avenue 60. The project will require construction of onsite sewer infrastructure that will be connected to existing sewer lines along Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, and wastewater will be transported to WRP-7. Currently, WRP-7 has a capacity of 5 million gallons per day and CVWD works to expand the plant’s capacity where needed. Buildout of the site will include a hotel building and retail shops of 76,870 square feet hotel building and the rehabilitation of the existing Fresh and Easy store, which is currently vacant and will result in increased wastewater flows. The proposed project has the potential to generate 43,889 gallons per day of wastewater, which is less than 1% of WRP-7’s capacity. The project site will be connected to the CVWD’s wastewater treatment facilities and is subject to wastewater treatment standards established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. All components of the proposed project will be required to design facilities consistent with CVWD and Regional Board standards. These standards and requirements will assure that impacts associated with wastewater standards will be less than significant. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -91- b, d) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will require water for domestic use and landscape irrigation for the food market and a hotel. As discussed in Section IX, Hydrology and Water Quality, the total water demand for the project would be 33.06 acre-feet per year. According to CVWD’s latest Urban Water Management Plan (2015), approximately 28.8 million acre-feet of water is stored in the Whitewater River sub-basin and the proposed project's water demand will be less than 1 percent of CVWD's groundwater supplies. Therefore, project impacts associated with domestic water demand are expected to be less than significant. The proposed project will be required to implement all water conservation measures imposed by CVWD under both normal and drought conditions over the life of the project. The proposed project will tie into existing domestic water lines in Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. No new wells or additional water infrastructure or entitlements will be required. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be required to contain the 100-year storm on-site, as required by City standards. The site is divided into three watershed areas. The drainage system will be designed to drain to three on-site retention facilities which have sufficient capacity to accommodate the on-site runoff. Please also see Section IX., Hydrology and Water Resources for a comprehensive description of the flood control proposal for the site. The drainage system will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer to assure that it meets City standards. These standards and requirements will assure that impacts associated with storm water management will be less than significant. f, g) Less Than Significant Impact. The City has an exclusive franchise agreement with Burrtec Waste and Recycling Services, LLC. for its collection and disposal of solid waste from the project site. All waste generated on the project site will be collected and transported to the Edom Hill Transfer Station, located in the City of Cathedral City. From the transfer station, waste will be further transferred to one of the three regional landfills: Lamb Canyon or Badlands. These landfills are owned and operated by Riverside County. The Lamb Canyon Landfill and Badlands have a permitted capacity of 33,041,000 and 33,560,993 cubic yards, respectively, with a maximum disposal capacity of 5,000 and 4,000 tons per day, respectively. The project will generate solid waste and both of the landfills have the capacity to accommodate waste generated by future development on the project site. Burrtec is also required to comply with local, regional and state requirements associated with solid waste disposal. Impacts will be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: None. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -92- XVIV. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?  b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?  c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?  a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Biological Resources The project site is not located within the boundaries of a CVMSHCP-designated conservation area, and does not contain any wildlife corridors or biological linkage areas. However, onsite trees and bushes at the southern and southwestern portion of the Specific Plan area could provide habitat for nesting birds, therefore, a pre-construction survey will be required to avoid impacts to nesting birds covered by the MBTA. The proposed project will not significantly reduce fish or wildlife habitat or otherwise adversely impact a fish or wildlife species. The construction of the project has the potential to impact nesting birds, but the mitigation measures included in this document will reduce those impacts to less than significant levels. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -93- Cultural Resources: Multiple archaeological resources (i.e. a human cremation site and an isolated pottery sherd) were found on the Specific Plan area. Their presence suggests the possibility that additional artifacts of unknown quantity and quality could be found during grading. Over-excavation for the hotel site has the potential to uncover additional resources. The ground disturbing activities associated with the proposed project’s Phase II may unearth additional sensitive resources, which would represent a potentially significant impact. Therefore, mitigation measures have been included in this Initial Study to assure that impacts associated with historical/archaeological resources remain less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. A significant impact could occur if the proposed project, in conjunction with related projects, would result in impacts that would be less than significant when viewed separately, but would be significant when viewed together. The impacts of the proposed project are individually limited and not cumulatively considerable. All environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the proposed project would be less than significant, and when viewed in conjunction with other closely related past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects, would not be significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. This Initial Study identifies potential impacts associated with noise and vibration as a result of construction activities of the proposed project. Once completed, the noise levels on the project site will be similar to noise levels in the area currently, and will be within acceptable levels as defined by the General Plan. Mitigation measures have been included in this Initial Study to assure that impacts associated with construction activities are reduced to less than significant levels. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -94- References: I. AESTHETICS: 2035 General Plan; La Quinta Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code; California Department of Transportation (California Scenic Highway Mapping System); http://www.dot.ca.gov/design/lap/livability/scenic-highways/; Accessed March 2018; Project Specific Visualizations and Photographs. II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: California Department of Conservation, January 2012, and Riverside County Important Farmland Map, 2010; Jefferson Square Amended Specific Plan. III. AIR QUALITY: “Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology,” prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Revised, July 2008; “2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan,” August 1, 2003; CalEEMod Version 2016.3.1; Project materials.) IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: “Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan,” 2007. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: “Archaeological Monitoring Report for Jefferson Square Project,” prepared by CRM TECH in 2009. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: “Geotechnical Engineering Investigation,” prepared by Krazan and Associates, Inc. in May 2007; “Soil Survey of Riverside County, California, Coachella Valley Area,” U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, 1980. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: California Global Warming Solutions Act; CalEEMod Version 2016.3.1; La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (2012). VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: California Department of Toxic Substances Control Hazardous Waste; State Water Resources Control Board. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: FEMA Flood Insurance Rate FIRM Panel No. 06065C2232G; “Preliminary Hydrological Report for CCD Hotels and Resorts-La Quinta” prepared by DRC Engineering, Inc. February 2018; “Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan” prepared by DRC Engineering, Inc. in March 2018. X. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) 2003; Figure 4-1-Conservation Areas; Project materials. XI. MINERAL RESOURCES: 2035 General Plan. XII. NOISE: “Jefferson Square Noise Impact Analysis,” prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on April 4, 2018. XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: California Department of Finance - Report E-1 - Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State January 1, 2016 and 2017. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES: Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -95- Google Earth Pro 7.3.1.4507; Accessed in April 2018. XV. RECREATION: 2035 General Plan. XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: “Focused Traffic Impact Study for the Jefferson Square Shopping Center,” prepared by Clyde E. Sweet and Associates in May 2008; “Urban Crossroads Trip Generation Memo,” prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., in January 2008; “Jefferson Square Trip Generation Assessment,” prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., in March 2018. XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES: “Archaeological Monitoring Report for Jefferson Square Project,” prepared by CRM TECH in 2009. XVIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: http://www.cvwd.org/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/511, accessed in April 2018. Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -96- Appendix A Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Air Quality - CalEEMod 2016.3.1 Outputs Project Characteristics - Land Use - Only a hotel with retails shops will be a new building on an existing Specific Plan of 10.7 acres. Hotel and Fresh and Easy SF is used here. Construction Phase - Construction of one year is assumed. Grading - Total 5,700 CY will be imported. And, 11,500 CY will be exported. Vehicle Trips - Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Area Mitigation - Assumes low VOC. 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Hotel 164.00 Room 2.42 105,763.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 1000sqft 0.59 25,778.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 15 Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 31 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Imperial Irrigation District 2020Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1270.9 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 1 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExteriorV alue 100 110 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInteriorV alue 100 110 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingCheck False True tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingValue 100 110 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 40 0 tblLandUse BuildingSpaceSquareFeet 238,128.00 96,914.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 238,128.00 105,763.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 0.00 25,778.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 5.47 2.42 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.00 0.59 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2018 2020 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 1,438.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 2 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 2.1 Overall Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2018 0.0517 0.8653 0.2984 1.5100e- 003 0.1407 0.0231 0.1638 0.0716 0.0214 0.0929 0.0000 145.3515 145.3515 0.0178 0.0000 145.7967 2019 1.7415 2.0214 1.7579 3.3200e- 003 0.0619 0.1121 0.1740 0.0167 0.1054 0.1221 0.0000 295.7412 295.7412 0.0553 0.0000 297.1233 Maximum 1.7415 2.0214 1.7579 3.3200e- 003 0.1407 0.1121 0.1740 0.0716 0.1054 0.1221 0.0000 295.7412 295.7412 0.0553 0.0000 297.1233 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2018 0.0517 0.8653 0.2984 1.5100e- 003 0.0453 0.0231 0.0684 0.0201 0.0214 0.0414 0.0000 145.3514 145.3514 0.0178 0.0000 145.7967 2019 1.7415 2.0214 1.7579 3.3200e- 003 0.0619 0.1121 0.1740 0.0167 0.1054 0.1221 0.0000 295.7409 295.7409 0.0553 0.0000 297.1230 Maximum 1.7415 2.0214 1.7579 3.3200e- 003 0.0619 0.1121 0.1740 0.0201 0.1054 0.1221 0.0000 295.7409 295.7409 0.0553 0.0000 297.1230 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.09 0.00 28.24 58.38 0.00 23.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 3 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 0.4334 2.0000e- 005 2.1100e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0700e- 003 4.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3400e- 003 Energy 0.0344 0.3126 0.2626 1.8800e- 003 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0000 1,474.299 9 1,474.299 9 0.0324 0.0116 1,478.564 3 Mobile 0.3836 2.0352 4.5795 0.0150 1.1681 0.0154 1.1835 0.3130 0.0145 0.3275 0.0000 1,386.645 8 1,386.645 8 0.0749 0.0000 1,388.517 9 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 18.2266 0.0000 18.2266 1.0772 0.0000 45.1555 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.3198 34.1875 35.5073 0.1363 3.3600e- 003 39.9177 Total 0.8514 2.3477 4.8442 0.0169 1.1681 0.0392 1.2073 0.3130 0.0382 0.3513 19.5464 2,895.137 2 2,914.683 6 1.3208 0.0150 2,952.159 8 Unmitigated Operational Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 12-1-2018 2-28-2019 1.4853 1.4853 2 3-1-2019 5-31-2019 0.8712 0.8712 3 6-1-2019 8-31-2019 0.7136 0.7136 4 9-1-2019 9-30-2019 0.5197 0.5197 Highest 1.4853 1.4853 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 4 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 0.4384 2.0000e- 005 2.1100e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0700e- 003 4.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3400e- 003 Energy 0.0344 0.3126 0.2626 1.8800e- 003 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0000 1,474.299 9 1,474.299 9 0.0324 0.0116 1,478.564 3 Mobile 0.3836 2.0352 4.5795 0.0150 1.1681 0.0154 1.1835 0.3130 0.0145 0.3275 0.0000 1,386.645 8 1,386.645 8 0.0749 0.0000 1,388.517 9 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 18.2266 0.0000 18.2266 1.0772 0.0000 45.1555 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.3198 34.1875 35.5073 0.1363 3.3600e- 003 39.9177 Total 0.8563 2.3477 4.8442 0.0169 1.1681 0.0392 1.2073 0.3130 0.0382 0.3513 19.5464 2,895.137 2 2,914.683 6 1.3208 0.0150 2,952.159 8 Mitigated Operational 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction -0.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 5 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 12/1/2018 12/14/2018 5 5 2 Grading Grading 12/15/2018 12/28/2018 5 8 3 Building Construction Building Construction 12/29/2018 7/26/2019 5 230 4 Paving Paving 7/27/2019 9/6/2019 5 18 5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/7/2019 11/22/2019 5 18 OffRoad Equipment Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 158,645; Non-Residential Outdoor: 52,882; Striped Parking Area: 1,547 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 4 Acres of Paving: 0.59 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 6 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 1,438.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 55.00 22.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 11.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 7 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0903 0.0000 0.0903 0.0497 0.0000 0.0497 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0228 0.2410 0.1124 1.9000e- 004 0.0129 0.0129 0.0119 0.0119 0.0000 17.3800 17.3800 5.4100e- 003 0.0000 17.5152 Total 0.0228 0.2410 0.1124 1.9000e- 004 0.0903 0.0129 0.1032 0.0497 0.0119 0.0615 0.0000 17.3800 17.3800 5.4100e- 003 0.0000 17.5152 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Use Soil Stabilizer Replace Ground Cover Water Exposed Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 8 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0126 0.4571 0.0850 1.1300e- 003 0.0154 1.7200e- 003 0.0171 4.5000e- 003 1.6400e- 003 6.1500e- 003 0.0000 110.9284 110.9284 7.8000e- 003 0.0000 111.1234 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 4.8000e- 004 3.9000e- 004 4.2000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 003 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.7000e- 004 0.0000 0.9473 0.9473 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.9481 Total 0.0131 0.4575 0.0892 1.1400e- 003 0.0164 1.7300e- 003 0.0181 4.7600e- 003 1.6500e- 003 6.4200e- 003 0.0000 111.8757 111.8757 7.8300e- 003 0.0000 112.0715 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0203 0.0000 0.0203 0.0112 0.0000 0.0112 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0228 0.2410 0.1124 1.9000e- 004 0.0129 0.0129 0.0119 0.0119 0.0000 17.3799 17.3799 5.4100e- 003 0.0000 17.5152 Total 0.0228 0.2410 0.1124 1.9000e- 004 0.0203 0.0129 0.0332 0.0112 0.0119 0.0230 0.0000 17.3799 17.3799 5.4100e- 003 0.0000 17.5152 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 9 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0126 0.4571 0.0850 1.1300e- 003 0.0154 1.7200e- 003 0.0171 4.5000e- 003 1.6400e- 003 6.1500e- 003 0.0000 110.9284 110.9284 7.8000e- 003 0.0000 111.1234 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 4.8000e- 004 3.9000e- 004 4.2000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 003 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.7000e- 004 0.0000 0.9473 0.9473 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.9481 Total 0.0131 0.4575 0.0892 1.1400e- 003 0.0164 1.7300e- 003 0.0181 4.7600e- 003 1.6500e- 003 6.4200e- 003 0.0000 111.8757 111.8757 7.8300e- 003 0.0000 112.0715 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0328 0.0000 0.0328 0.0168 0.0000 0.0168 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0139 0.1534 0.0829 1.5000e- 004 7.7600e- 003 7.7600e- 003 7.1400e- 003 7.1400e- 003 0.0000 13.5534 13.5534 4.2200e- 003 0.0000 13.6589 Total 0.0139 0.1534 0.0829 1.5000e- 004 0.0328 7.7600e- 003 0.0405 0.0168 7.1400e- 003 0.0240 0.0000 13.5534 13.5534 4.2200e- 003 0.0000 13.6589 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 10 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.3 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 4.0000e- 004 3.3000e- 004 3.5000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.3000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.7894 0.7894 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7901 Total 4.0000e- 004 3.3000e- 004 3.5000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.3000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.7894 0.7894 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7901 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 7.3700e- 003 0.0000 7.3700e- 003 3.7900e- 003 0.0000 3.7900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0139 0.1534 0.0829 1.5000e- 004 7.7600e- 003 7.7600e- 003 7.1400e- 003 7.1400e- 003 0.0000 13.5534 13.5534 4.2200e- 003 0.0000 13.6589 Total 0.0139 0.1534 0.0829 1.5000e- 004 7.3700e- 003 7.7600e- 003 0.0151 3.7900e- 003 7.1400e- 003 0.0109 0.0000 13.5534 13.5534 4.2200e- 003 0.0000 13.6589 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 11 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.3 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 4.0000e- 004 3.3000e- 004 3.5000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.3000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.7894 0.7894 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7901 Total 4.0000e- 004 3.3000e- 004 3.5000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.3000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.7894 0.7894 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7901 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 1.3400e- 003 0.0117 8.7900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.5000e- 004 7.5000e- 004 7.0000e- 004 7.0000e- 004 0.0000 1.1888 1.1888 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.1961 Total 1.3400e- 003 0.0117 8.7900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.5000e- 004 7.5000e- 004 7.0000e- 004 7.0000e- 004 0.0000 1.1888 1.1888 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.1961 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 12 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.4 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 5.0000e- 005 1.3600e- 003 3.5000e- 004 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2748 0.2748 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2753 Worker 1.5000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 1.2800e- 003 0.0000 3.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2894 0.2894 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2897 Total 2.0000e- 004 1.4800e- 003 1.6300e- 003 0.0000 3.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.5642 0.5642 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5649 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 1.3400e- 003 0.0117 8.7900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.5000e- 004 7.5000e- 004 7.0000e- 004 7.0000e- 004 0.0000 1.1888 1.1888 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.1961 Total 1.3400e- 003 0.0117 8.7900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.5000e- 004 7.5000e- 004 7.0000e- 004 7.0000e- 004 0.0000 1.1888 1.1888 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.1961 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 13 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.4 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 5.0000e- 005 1.3600e- 003 3.5000e- 004 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2748 0.2748 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2753 Worker 1.5000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 1.2800e- 003 0.0000 3.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2894 0.2894 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2897 Total 2.0000e- 004 1.4800e- 003 1.6300e- 003 0.0000 3.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.5642 0.5642 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5649 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.1759 1.5704 1.2787 2.0000e- 003 0.0961 0.0961 0.0904 0.0904 0.0000 175.1526 175.1526 0.0427 0.0000 176.2194 Total 0.1759 1.5704 1.2787 2.0000e- 003 0.0961 0.0961 0.0904 0.0904 0.0000 175.1526 175.1526 0.0427 0.0000 176.2194 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 14 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.4 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 6.4400e- 003 0.1911 0.0479 4.2000e- 004 0.0103 1.2500e- 003 0.0116 2.9800e- 003 1.2000e- 003 4.1800e- 003 0.0000 40.5769 40.5769 2.8100e- 003 0.0000 40.6471 Worker 0.0198 0.0157 0.1708 4.6000e- 004 0.0450 3.6000e- 004 0.0453 0.0119 3.3000e- 004 0.0123 0.0000 41.7655 41.7655 1.3100e- 003 0.0000 41.7981 Total 0.0262 0.2068 0.2188 8.8000e- 004 0.0553 1.6100e- 003 0.0569 0.0149 1.5300e- 003 0.0165 0.0000 82.3424 82.3424 4.1200e- 003 0.0000 82.4452 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.1759 1.5704 1.2787 2.0000e- 003 0.0961 0.0961 0.0904 0.0904 0.0000 175.1524 175.1524 0.0427 0.0000 176.2191 Total 0.1759 1.5704 1.2787 2.0000e- 003 0.0961 0.0961 0.0904 0.0904 0.0000 175.1524 175.1524 0.0427 0.0000 176.2191 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 15 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.4 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 6.4400e- 003 0.1911 0.0479 4.2000e- 004 0.0103 1.2500e- 003 0.0116 2.9800e- 003 1.2000e- 003 4.1800e- 003 0.0000 40.5769 40.5769 2.8100e- 003 0.0000 40.6471 Worker 0.0198 0.0157 0.1708 4.6000e- 004 0.0450 3.6000e- 004 0.0453 0.0119 3.3000e- 004 0.0123 0.0000 41.7655 41.7655 1.3100e- 003 0.0000 41.7981 Total 0.0262 0.2068 0.2188 8.8000e- 004 0.0553 1.6100e- 003 0.0569 0.0149 1.5300e- 003 0.0165 0.0000 82.3424 82.3424 4.1200e- 003 0.0000 82.4452 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0190 0.1914 0.1847 2.8000e- 004 0.0108 0.0108 9.9600e- 003 9.9600e- 003 0.0000 25.0835 25.0835 7.7200e- 003 0.0000 25.2764 Paving 1.2900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0203 0.1914 0.1847 2.8000e- 004 0.0108 0.0108 9.9600e- 003 9.9600e- 003 0.0000 25.0835 25.0835 7.7200e- 003 0.0000 25.2764 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 16 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.5 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4500e- 003 1.1500e- 003 0.0125 3.0000e- 005 3.2900e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.3200e- 003 8.7000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0579 3.0579 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0603 Total 1.4500e- 003 1.1500e- 003 0.0125 3.0000e- 005 3.2900e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.3200e- 003 8.7000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0579 3.0579 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0603 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0190 0.1914 0.1847 2.8000e- 004 0.0108 0.0108 9.9600e- 003 9.9600e- 003 0.0000 25.0834 25.0834 7.7200e- 003 0.0000 25.2764 Paving 1.2900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0203 0.1914 0.1847 2.8000e- 004 0.0108 0.0108 9.9600e- 003 9.9600e- 003 0.0000 25.0834 25.0834 7.7200e- 003 0.0000 25.2764 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 17 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.5 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4500e- 003 1.1500e- 003 0.0125 3.0000e- 005 3.2900e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.3200e- 003 8.7000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0579 3.0579 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0603 Total 1.4500e- 003 1.1500e- 003 0.0125 3.0000e- 005 3.2900e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.3200e- 003 8.7000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0579 3.0579 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0603 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 1.5088 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 7.3300e- 003 0.0505 0.0506 8.0000e- 005 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 0.0000 7.0215 7.0215 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 7.0363 Total 1.5162 0.0505 0.0506 8.0000e- 005 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 0.0000 7.0215 7.0215 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 7.0363 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 18 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 3.6 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4600e- 003 1.1600e- 003 0.0126 3.0000e- 005 3.3200e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.3500e- 003 8.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 0.0000 3.0834 3.0834 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0858 Total 1.4600e- 003 1.1600e- 003 0.0126 3.0000e- 005 3.3200e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.3500e- 003 8.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 0.0000 3.0834 3.0834 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0858 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 1.5088 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 7.3300e- 003 0.0505 0.0506 8.0000e- 005 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 0.0000 7.0214 7.0214 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 7.0363 Total 1.5162 0.0505 0.0506 8.0000e- 005 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 3.5400e- 003 0.0000 7.0214 7.0214 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 7.0363 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 19 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.6 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4600e- 003 1.1600e- 003 0.0126 3.0000e- 005 3.3200e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.3500e- 003 8.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 0.0000 3.0834 3.0834 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0858 Total 1.4600e- 003 1.1600e- 003 0.0126 3.0000e- 005 3.3200e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.3500e- 003 8.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 0.0000 3.0834 3.0834 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 3.0858 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 20 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.3836 2.0352 4.5795 0.0150 1.1681 0.0154 1.1835 0.3130 0.0145 0.3275 0.0000 1,386.645 8 1,386.645 8 0.0749 0.0000 1,388.517 9 Unmitigated 0.3836 2.0352 4.5795 0.0150 1.1681 0.0154 1.1835 0.3130 0.0145 0.3275 0.0000 1,386.645 8 1,386.645 8 0.0749 0.0000 1,388.517 9 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Hotel 1,339.88 1,343.16 975.80 3,074,193 3,074,193 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 1,339.88 1,343.16 975.80 3,074,193 3,074,193 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 Other Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Hotel 0.547828 0.043645 0.199892 0.122290 0.016774 0.005862 0.020637 0.032653 0.002037 0.001944 0.004777 0.000705 0.000956 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.547828 0.043645 0.199892 0.122290 0.016774 0.005862 0.020637 0.032653 0.002037 0.001944 0.004777 0.000705 0.000956 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 21 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,134.028 1 1,134.028 1 0.0259 5.3500e- 003 1,136.270 5 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,134.028 1 1,134.028 1 0.0259 5.3500e- 003 1,136.270 5 NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0344 0.3126 0.2626 1.8800e- 003 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0000 340.2717 340.2717 6.5200e- 003 6.2400e- 003 342.2938 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0344 0.3126 0.2626 1.8800e- 003 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0000 340.2717 340.2717 6.5200e- 003 6.2400e- 003 342.2938 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 22 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Hotel 6.37645e +006 0.0344 0.3126 0.2626 1.8800e- 003 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0000 340.2717 340.2717 6.5200e- 003 6.2400e- 003 342.2938 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0344 0.3126 0.2626 1.8800e- 003 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0000 340.2717 340.2717 6.5200e- 003 6.2400e- 003 342.2938 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Hotel 6.37645e +006 0.0344 0.3126 0.2626 1.8800e- 003 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0000 340.2717 340.2717 6.5200e- 003 6.2400e- 003 342.2938 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0344 0.3126 0.2626 1.8800e- 003 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0238 0.0000 340.2717 340.2717 6.5200e- 003 6.2400e- 003 342.2938 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 23 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Hotel 1.96719e +006 1,134.028 1 0.0259 5.3500e- 003 1,136.270 5 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1,134.028 1 0.0259 5.3500e- 003 1,136.270 5 Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Hotel 1.96719e +006 1,134.028 1 0.0259 5.3500e- 003 1,136.270 5 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1,134.028 1 0.0259 5.3500e- 003 1,136.270 5 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 24 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Exterior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior Use Low VOC Cleaning Supplies ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.4384 2.0000e- 005 2.1100e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0700e- 003 4.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3400e- 003 Unmitigated 0.4334 2.0000e- 005 2.1100e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0700e- 003 4.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3400e- 003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 25 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.0494 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.3838 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.0000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.1100e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0700e- 003 4.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3400e- 003 Total 0.4334 2.0000e- 005 2.1100e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0700e- 003 4.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3400e- 003 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.0543 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.3838 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.0000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.1100e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0700e- 003 4.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3400e- 003 Total 0.4384 2.0000e- 005 2.1100e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0700e- 003 4.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3400e- 003 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 26 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated 35.5073 0.1363 3.3600e- 003 39.9177 Unmitigated 35.5073 0.1363 3.3600e- 003 39.9177 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Hotel 4.16015 / 0.462239 35.5073 0.1363 3.3600e- 003 39.9177 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 35.5073 0.1363 3.3600e- 003 39.9177 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 27 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Hotel 4.16015 / 0.462239 35.5073 0.1363 3.3600e- 003 39.9177 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 35.5073 0.1363 3.3600e- 003 39.9177 Mitigated 8.0 Waste Detail Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT/yr Mitigated 18.2266 1.0772 0.0000 45.1555 Unmitigated 18.2266 1.0772 0.0000 45.1555 Category/Year CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 28 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 8.2 Waste by Land Use Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Hotel 89.79 18.2266 1.0772 0.0000 45.1555 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 18.2266 1.0772 0.0000 45.1555 Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Hotel 89.79 18.2266 1.0772 0.0000 45.1555 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 18.2266 1.0772 0.0000 45.1555 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 29 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual 11.0 Vegetation 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:07 PMPage 30 of 30 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual Project Characteristics - Land Use - Only a hotel with retails shops will be a new building on an existing Specific Plan of 10.7 acres. Hotel and Fresh and Easy SF is used here. Construction Phase - Construction of one year is assumed. Grading - Total 5,700 CY will be imported. And, 11,500 CY will be exported. Vehicle Trips - Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Area Mitigation - Assumes low VOC. 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Hotel 164.00 Room 2.42 105,763.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 1000sqft 0.59 25,778.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 15 Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 31 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Imperial Irrigation District 2020Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1270.9 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 1 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExteriorV alue 100 110 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInteriorV alue 100 110 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingCheck False True tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingValue 100 110 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 40 0 tblLandUse BuildingSpaceSquareFeet 238,128.00 96,914.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 238,128.00 105,763.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 0.00 25,778.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 5.47 2.42 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.00 0.59 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2018 2020 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 1,438.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 2 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2018 7.1532 136.8203 39.7774 0.2688 21.3921 2.9190 24.3110 10.8947 2.6980 13.5927 0.0000 28,692.27 81 28,692.27 81 2.8856 0.0000 28,764.41 87 2019 55.1869 23.7836 20.2437 0.0391 0.7556 1.3113 2.0669 0.2036 1.2331 1.4367 0.0000 3,848.807 5 3,848.807 5 0.6919 0.0000 3,866.103 9 Maximum 55.1869 136.8203 39.7774 0.2688 21.3921 2.9190 24.3110 10.8947 2.6980 13.5927 0.0000 28,692.27 81 28,692.27 81 2.8856 0.0000 28,764.41 87 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2018 7.1532 136.8203 39.7774 0.2688 7.3907 2.9190 10.3097 3.1985 2.6980 5.8964 0.0000 28,692.27 81 28,692.27 81 2.8856 0.0000 28,764.41 87 2019 55.1869 23.7836 20.2437 0.0391 0.7556 1.3113 2.0669 0.2036 1.2331 1.4367 0.0000 3,848.807 5 3,848.807 5 0.6919 0.0000 3,866.103 9 Maximum 55.1869 136.8203 39.7774 0.2688 7.3907 2.9190 10.3097 3.1985 2.6980 5.8964 0.0000 28,692.27 81 28,692.27 81 2.8856 0.0000 28,764.41 87 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 63.22 0.00 53.08 69.35 0.00 51.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 3 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 2.3754 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Energy 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Mobile 2.3711 11.2688 27.2286 0.0897 6.8148 0.0880 6.9029 1.8235 0.0826 1.9061 9,115.9530 9,115.953 0 0.4743 9,127.8110 Total 4.9349 12.9817 28.6842 0.0999 6.8148 0.2182 7.0331 1.8235 0.2128 2.0364 11,171.25 12 11,171.25 12 0.5138 0.0377 11,195.32 50 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 2.9129 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Energy 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Mobile 2.3711 11.2688 27.2286 0.0897 6.8148 0.0880 6.9029 1.8235 0.0826 1.9061 9,115.9530 9,115.953 0 0.4743 9,127.8110 Total 5.4724 12.9817 28.6842 0.0999 6.8148 0.2182 7.0331 1.8235 0.2128 2.0364 11,171.25 12 11,171.25 12 0.5138 0.0377 11,195.32 50 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 4 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 12/1/2018 12/14/2018 5 5 2 Grading Grading 12/15/2018 12/28/2018 5 8 3 Building Construction Building Construction 12/29/2018 7/26/2019 5 230 4 Paving Paving 7/27/2019 9/6/2019 5 18 5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/7/2019 11/22/2019 5 18 OffRoad Equipment ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction -10.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 158,645; Non-Residential Outdoor: 52,882; Striped Parking Area: 1,547 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 4 Acres of Paving: 0.59 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 5 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 1,438.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 55.00 22.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 11.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 6 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.5627 48.1988 22.4763 0.0380 2.5769 2.5769 2.3708 2.3708 3,831.623 9 3,831.623 9 1.1928 3,861.444 8 Total 4.5627 48.1988 22.4763 0.0380 18.0663 2.5769 20.6432 9.9307 2.3708 12.3014 3,831.623 9 3,831.623 9 1.1928 3,861.444 8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Use Soil Stabilizer Replace Ground Cover Water Exposed Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 7 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 2.4935 88.5520 16.3980 0.2285 3.1246 0.3405 3.4651 0.9107 0.3257 1.2364 24,641.17 09 24,641.17 09 1.6853 24,683.30 35 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0970 0.0695 0.9032 2.2100e- 003 0.2012 1.6000e- 003 0.2028 0.0534 1.4800e- 003 0.0548 219.4833 219.4833 7.4800e- 003 219.6704 Total 2.5905 88.6216 17.3011 0.2308 3.3258 0.3421 3.6679 0.9641 0.3272 1.2913 24,860.65 42 24,860.65 42 1.6928 24,902.97 39 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 4.0649 0.0000 4.0649 2.2344 0.0000 2.2344 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.5627 48.1988 22.4763 0.0380 2.5769 2.5769 2.3708 2.3708 0.0000 3,831.623 9 3,831.623 9 1.1928 3,861.444 8 Total 4.5627 48.1988 22.4763 0.0380 4.0649 2.5769 6.6418 2.2344 2.3708 4.6052 0.0000 3,831.623 9 3,831.623 9 1.1928 3,861.444 8 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 8 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 2.4935 88.5520 16.3980 0.2285 3.1246 0.3405 3.4651 0.9107 0.3257 1.2364 24,641.17 09 24,641.17 09 1.6853 24,683.30 35 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0970 0.0695 0.9032 2.2100e- 003 0.2012 1.6000e- 003 0.2028 0.0534 1.4800e- 003 0.0548 219.4833 219.4833 7.4800e- 003 219.6704 Total 2.5905 88.6216 17.3011 0.2308 3.3258 0.3421 3.6679 0.9641 0.3272 1.2913 24,860.65 42 24,860.65 42 1.6928 24,902.97 39 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.5523 0.0000 6.5523 3.3675 0.0000 3.3675 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7733 30.6725 16.5770 0.0297 1.5513 1.5513 1.4272 1.4272 2,988.021 6 2,988.021 6 0.9302 3,011.2769 Total 2.7733 30.6725 16.5770 0.0297 6.5523 1.5513 8.1037 3.3675 1.4272 4.7947 2,988.021 6 2,988.021 6 0.9302 3,011.276 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 9 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.3 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0808 0.0580 0.7526 1.8400e- 003 0.1677 1.3400e- 003 0.1690 0.0445 1.2300e- 003 0.0457 182.9028 182.9028 6.2400e- 003 183.0587 Total 0.0808 0.0580 0.7526 1.8400e- 003 0.1677 1.3400e- 003 0.1690 0.0445 1.2300e- 003 0.0457 182.9028 182.9028 6.2400e- 003 183.0587 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.4743 0.0000 1.4743 0.7577 0.0000 0.7577 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7733 30.6725 16.5770 0.0297 1.5513 1.5513 1.4272 1.4272 0.0000 2,988.021 6 2,988.021 6 0.9302 3,011.2769 Total 2.7733 30.6725 16.5770 0.0297 1.4743 1.5513 3.0256 0.7577 1.4272 2.1849 0.0000 2,988.021 6 2,988.021 6 0.9302 3,011.276 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 10 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.3 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0808 0.0580 0.7526 1.8400e- 003 0.1677 1.3400e- 003 0.1690 0.0445 1.2300e- 003 0.0457 182.9028 182.9028 6.2400e- 003 183.0587 Total 0.0808 0.0580 0.7526 1.8400e- 003 0.1677 1.3400e- 003 0.1690 0.0445 1.2300e- 003 0.0457 182.9028 182.9028 6.2400e- 003 183.0587 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.6795 23.3900 17.5804 0.0269 1.4999 1.4999 1.4099 1.4099 2,620.935 1 2,620.935 1 0.6421 2,636.988 3 Total 2.6795 23.3900 17.5804 0.0269 1.4999 1.4999 1.4099 1.4099 2,620.935 1 2,620.935 1 0.6421 2,636.988 3 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 11 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.4 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0936 2.6661 0.6640 5.7600e- 003 0.1408 0.0195 0.1603 0.0405 0.0186 0.0592 613.0477 613.0477 0.0417 614.0908 Worker 0.2964 0.2125 2.7597 6.7400e- 003 0.6148 4.9000e- 003 0.6197 0.1630 4.5200e- 003 0.1676 670.6434 670.6434 0.0229 671.2151 Total 0.3900 2.8785 3.4236 0.0125 0.7556 0.0244 0.7800 0.2036 0.0232 0.2267 1,283.691 1 1,283.691 1 0.0646 1,285.305 9 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.6795 23.3900 17.5804 0.0269 1.4999 1.4999 1.4099 1.4099 0.0000 2,620.935 1 2,620.935 1 0.6421 2,636.988 3 Total 2.6795 23.3900 17.5804 0.0269 1.4999 1.4999 1.4099 1.4099 0.0000 2,620.935 1 2,620.935 1 0.6421 2,636.988 3 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 12 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.4 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0936 2.6661 0.6640 5.7600e- 003 0.1408 0.0195 0.1603 0.0405 0.0186 0.0592 613.0477 613.0477 0.0417 614.0908 Worker 0.2964 0.2125 2.7597 6.7400e- 003 0.6148 4.9000e- 003 0.6197 0.1630 4.5200e- 003 0.1676 670.6434 670.6434 0.0229 671.2151 Total 0.3900 2.8785 3.4236 0.0125 0.7556 0.0244 0.7800 0.2036 0.0232 0.2267 1,283.691 1 1,283.691 1 0.0646 1,285.305 9 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3612 21.0788 17.1638 0.0269 1.2899 1.2899 1.2127 1.2127 2,591.580 2 2,591.580 2 0.6313 2,607.363 5 Total 2.3612 21.0788 17.1638 0.0269 1.2899 1.2899 1.2127 1.2127 2,591.580 2 2,591.580 2 0.6313 2,607.363 5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 13 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.4 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0848 2.5173 0.6085 5.7000e- 003 0.1408 0.0167 0.1575 0.0405 0.0160 0.0565 607.6834 607.6834 0.0402 608.6886 Worker 0.2694 0.1874 2.4714 6.5200e- 003 0.6148 4.7800e- 003 0.6196 0.1630 4.4100e- 003 0.1675 649.5440 649.5440 0.0203 650.0518 Total 0.3542 2.7048 3.0799 0.0122 0.7556 0.0215 0.7770 0.2036 0.0204 0.2239 1,257.227 3 1,257.227 3 0.0605 1,258.740 4 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3612 21.0788 17.1638 0.0269 1.2899 1.2899 1.2127 1.2127 0.0000 2,591.580 2 2,591.580 2 0.6313 2,607.363 5 Total 2.3612 21.0788 17.1638 0.0269 1.2899 1.2899 1.2127 1.2127 0.0000 2,591.580 2 2,591.580 2 0.6313 2,607.363 5 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 14 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.4 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0848 2.5173 0.6085 5.7000e- 003 0.1408 0.0167 0.1575 0.0405 0.0160 0.0565 607.6834 607.6834 0.0402 608.6886 Worker 0.2694 0.1874 2.4714 6.5200e- 003 0.6148 4.7800e- 003 0.6196 0.1630 4.4100e- 003 0.1675 649.5440 649.5440 0.0203 650.0518 Total 0.3542 2.7048 3.0799 0.0122 0.7556 0.0215 0.7770 0.2036 0.0204 0.2239 1,257.227 3 1,257.227 3 0.0605 1,258.740 4 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.2679 12.7604 12.3130 0.0189 0.7196 0.7196 0.6637 0.6637 1,843.319 1 1,843.319 1 0.5671 1,857.496 6 Paving 0.0859 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3538 12.7604 12.3130 0.0189 0.7196 0.7196 0.6637 0.6637 1,843.319 1 1,843.319 1 0.5671 1,857.496 6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 15 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.5 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0980 0.0682 0.8987 2.3700e- 003 0.2236 1.7400e- 003 0.2253 0.0593 1.6000e- 003 0.0609 236.1978 236.1978 7.3900e- 003 236.3825 Total 0.0980 0.0682 0.8987 2.3700e- 003 0.2236 1.7400e- 003 0.2253 0.0593 1.6000e- 003 0.0609 236.1978 236.1978 7.3900e- 003 236.3825 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.2679 12.7604 12.3130 0.0189 0.7196 0.7196 0.6637 0.6637 0.0000 1,843.319 1 1,843.319 1 0.5671 1,857.496 6 Paving 0.0859 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3538 12.7604 12.3130 0.0189 0.7196 0.7196 0.6637 0.6637 0.0000 1,843.319 1 1,843.319 1 0.5671 1,857.496 6 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 16 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.5 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0980 0.0682 0.8987 2.3700e- 003 0.2236 1.7400e- 003 0.2253 0.0593 1.6000e- 003 0.0609 236.1978 236.1978 7.3900e- 003 236.3825 Total 0.0980 0.0682 0.8987 2.3700e- 003 0.2236 1.7400e- 003 0.2253 0.0593 1.6000e- 003 0.0609 236.1978 236.1978 7.3900e- 003 236.3825 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 54.8666 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423 Total 55.1330 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 17 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 3.6 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0539 0.0375 0.4943 1.3000e- 003 0.1230 9.6000e- 004 0.1239 0.0326 8.8000e- 004 0.0335 129.9088 129.9088 4.0600e- 003 130.0104 Total 0.0539 0.0375 0.4943 1.3000e- 003 0.1230 9.6000e- 004 0.1239 0.0326 8.8000e- 004 0.0335 129.9088 129.9088 4.0600e- 003 130.0104 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 54.8666 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423 Total 55.1330 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 18 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.6 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0539 0.0375 0.4943 1.3000e- 003 0.1230 9.6000e- 004 0.1239 0.0326 8.8000e- 004 0.0335 129.9088 129.9088 4.0600e- 003 130.0104 Total 0.0539 0.0375 0.4943 1.3000e- 003 0.1230 9.6000e- 004 0.1239 0.0326 8.8000e- 004 0.0335 129.9088 129.9088 4.0600e- 003 130.0104 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 19 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 2.3711 11.2688 27.2286 0.0897 6.8148 0.0880 6.9029 1.8235 0.0826 1.9061 9,115.9530 9,115.9530 0.4743 9,127.8110 Unmitigated 2.3711 11.2688 27.2286 0.0897 6.8148 0.0880 6.9029 1.8235 0.0826 1.9061 9,115.9530 9,115.953 0 0.4743 9,127.8110 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Hotel 1,339.88 1,343.16 975.80 3,074,193 3,074,193 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 1,339.88 1,343.16 975.80 3,074,193 3,074,193 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 Other Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Hotel 0.547828 0.043645 0.199892 0.122290 0.016774 0.005862 0.020637 0.032653 0.002037 0.001944 0.004777 0.000705 0.000956 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.547828 0.043645 0.199892 0.122290 0.016774 0.005862 0.020637 0.032653 0.002037 0.001944 0.004777 0.000705 0.000956 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 20 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 21 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Hotel 17469.7 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Hotel 17.4697 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 22 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Exterior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior Use Low VOC Cleaning Supplies ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 2.9129 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Unmitigated 2.3754 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 23 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.2706 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 2.1032 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.5900e- 003 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Total 2.3754 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.2976 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 2.6136 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.5900e- 003 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Total 2.9129 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 24 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 11.0 Vegetation 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:08 PMPage 25 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer Project Characteristics - Land Use - Only a hotel with retails shops will be a new building on an existing Specific Plan of 10.7 acres. Hotel and Fresh and Easy SF is used here. Construction Phase - Construction of one year is assumed. Grading - Total 5,700 CY will be imported. And, 11,500 CY will be exported. Vehicle Trips - Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Area Mitigation - Assumes low VOC. 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Hotel 164.00 Room 2.42 105,763.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 1000sqft 0.59 25,778.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 15 Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 31 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Imperial Irrigation District 2020Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1270.9 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 1 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExteriorV alue 100 110 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInteriorV alue 100 110 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingCheck False True tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingValue 100 110 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 40 0 tblLandUse BuildingSpaceSquareFeet 238,128.00 96,914.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 238,128.00 105,763.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 0.00 25,778.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 5.47 2.42 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.00 0.59 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2018 2020 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 1,438.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 2 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2018 7.2356 138.0633 41.0770 0.2645 21.3921 2.9256 24.3177 10.8947 2.7043 13.5991 0.0000 28,236.10 72 28,236.10 72 2.9630 0.0000 28,310.18 08 2019 55.1917 23.8032 20.0711 0.0386 0.7556 1.3116 2.0672 0.2036 1.2333 1.4369 0.0000 3,789.436 6 3,789.436 6 0.6935 0.0000 3,806.774 7 Maximum 55.1917 138.0633 41.0770 0.2645 21.3921 2.9256 24.3177 10.8947 2.7043 13.5991 0.0000 28,236.10 72 28,236.10 72 2.9630 0.0000 28,310.18 08 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2018 7.2356 138.0633 41.0770 0.2645 7.3907 2.9256 10.3163 3.1985 2.7043 5.9028 0.0000 28,236.10 72 28,236.10 72 2.9630 0.0000 28,310.18 08 2019 55.1917 23.8032 20.0711 0.0386 0.7556 1.3116 2.0672 0.2036 1.2333 1.4369 0.0000 3,789.436 6 3,789.436 6 0.6935 0.0000 3,806.774 7 Maximum 55.1917 138.0633 41.0770 0.2645 7.3907 2.9256 10.3163 3.1985 2.7043 5.9028 0.0000 28,236.10 72 28,236.10 72 2.9630 0.0000 28,310.18 08 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 63.22 0.00 53.07 69.35 0.00 51.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 3 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 2.3754 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Energy 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Mobile 2.2543 11.4514 25.9254 0.0848 6.8148 0.0887 6.9035 1.8235 0.0832 1.9068 8,620.960 2 8,620.960 2 0.4773 8,632.893 1 Total 4.8181 13.1643 27.3809 0.0950 6.8148 0.2189 7.0337 1.8235 0.2135 2.0370 10,676.25 84 10,676.25 84 0.5168 0.0377 10,700.40 71 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 2.9129 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Energy 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Mobile 2.2543 11.4514 25.9254 0.0848 6.8148 0.0887 6.9035 1.8235 0.0832 1.9068 8,620.960 2 8,620.960 2 0.4773 8,632.893 1 Total 5.3556 13.1643 27.3809 0.0950 6.8148 0.2189 7.0337 1.8235 0.2135 2.0370 10,676.25 84 10,676.25 84 0.5168 0.0377 10,700.40 71 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 4 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 12/1/2018 12/14/2018 5 5 2 Grading Grading 12/15/2018 12/28/2018 5 8 3 Building Construction Building Construction 12/29/2018 7/26/2019 5 230 4 Paving Paving 7/27/2019 9/6/2019 5 18 5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/7/2019 11/22/2019 5 18 OffRoad Equipment ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction -11.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 158,645; Non-Residential Outdoor: 52,882; Striped Parking Area: 1,547 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 4 Acres of Paving: 0.59 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 5 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 1,438.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 55.00 22.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 11.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 6 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.5627 48.1988 22.4763 0.0380 2.5769 2.5769 2.3708 2.3708 3,831.623 9 3,831.623 9 1.1928 3,861.444 8 Total 4.5627 48.1988 22.4763 0.0380 18.0663 2.5769 20.6432 9.9307 2.3708 12.3014 3,831.623 9 3,831.623 9 1.1928 3,861.444 8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Use Soil Stabilizer Replace Ground Cover Water Exposed Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 7 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 2.5675 89.7883 17.7834 0.2244 3.1246 0.3471 3.4717 0.9107 0.3321 1.2428 24,199.161 1 24,199.161 1 1.7631 24,243.23 86 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1055 0.0762 0.8174 2.0600e- 003 0.2012 1.6000e- 003 0.2028 0.0534 1.4800e- 003 0.0548 205.3223 205.3223 7.0100e- 003 205.4974 Total 2.6729 89.8645 18.6007 0.2265 3.3258 0.3487 3.6745 0.9641 0.3336 1.2976 24,404.48 33 24,404.48 33 1.7701 24,448.73 61 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 4.0649 0.0000 4.0649 2.2344 0.0000 2.2344 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.5627 48.1988 22.4763 0.0380 2.5769 2.5769 2.3708 2.3708 0.0000 3,831.623 9 3,831.623 9 1.1928 3,861.444 8 Total 4.5627 48.1988 22.4763 0.0380 4.0649 2.5769 6.6418 2.2344 2.3708 4.6052 0.0000 3,831.623 9 3,831.623 9 1.1928 3,861.444 8 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 8 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 2.5675 89.7883 17.7834 0.2244 3.1246 0.3471 3.4717 0.9107 0.3321 1.2428 24,199.161 1 24,199.161 1 1.7631 24,243.23 86 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1055 0.0762 0.8174 2.0600e- 003 0.2012 1.6000e- 003 0.2028 0.0534 1.4800e- 003 0.0548 205.3223 205.3223 7.0100e- 003 205.4974 Total 2.6729 89.8645 18.6007 0.2265 3.3258 0.3487 3.6745 0.9641 0.3336 1.2976 24,404.48 33 24,404.48 33 1.7701 24,448.73 61 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.5523 0.0000 6.5523 3.3675 0.0000 3.3675 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7733 30.6725 16.5770 0.0297 1.5513 1.5513 1.4272 1.4272 2,988.021 6 2,988.021 6 0.9302 3,011.2769 Total 2.7733 30.6725 16.5770 0.0297 6.5523 1.5513 8.1037 3.3675 1.4272 4.7947 2,988.021 6 2,988.021 6 0.9302 3,011.276 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 9 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.3 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0879 0.0635 0.6811 1.7200e- 003 0.1677 1.3400e- 003 0.1690 0.0445 1.2300e- 003 0.0457 171.1019 171.1019 5.8400e- 003 171.2479 Total 0.0879 0.0635 0.6811 1.7200e- 003 0.1677 1.3400e- 003 0.1690 0.0445 1.2300e- 003 0.0457 171.1019 171.1019 5.8400e- 003 171.2479 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.4743 0.0000 1.4743 0.7577 0.0000 0.7577 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7733 30.6725 16.5770 0.0297 1.5513 1.5513 1.4272 1.4272 0.0000 2,988.021 6 2,988.021 6 0.9302 3,011.2769 Total 2.7733 30.6725 16.5770 0.0297 1.4743 1.5513 3.0256 0.7577 1.4272 2.1849 0.0000 2,988.021 6 2,988.021 6 0.9302 3,011.276 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 10 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.3 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0879 0.0635 0.6811 1.7200e- 003 0.1677 1.3400e- 003 0.1690 0.0445 1.2300e- 003 0.0457 171.1019 171.1019 5.8400e- 003 171.2479 Total 0.0879 0.0635 0.6811 1.7200e- 003 0.1677 1.3400e- 003 0.1690 0.0445 1.2300e- 003 0.0457 171.1019 171.1019 5.8400e- 003 171.2479 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.6795 23.3900 17.5804 0.0269 1.4999 1.4999 1.4099 1.4099 2,620.935 1 2,620.935 1 0.6421 2,636.988 3 Total 2.6795 23.3900 17.5804 0.0269 1.4999 1.4999 1.4099 1.4099 2,620.935 1 2,620.935 1 0.6421 2,636.988 3 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 11 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.4 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0977 2.6705 0.7370 5.6000e- 003 0.1408 0.0198 0.1606 0.0405 0.0189 0.0595 595.6642 595.6642 0.0448 596.7848 Worker 0.3222 0.2328 2.4975 6.3000e- 003 0.6148 4.9000e- 003 0.6197 0.1630 4.5200e- 003 0.1676 627.3736 627.3736 0.0214 627.9088 Total 0.4199 2.9033 3.2346 0.0119 0.7556 0.0247 0.7803 0.2036 0.0234 0.2270 1,223.037 7 1,223.037 7 0.0662 1,224.693 5 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.6795 23.3900 17.5804 0.0269 1.4999 1.4999 1.4099 1.4099 0.0000 2,620.935 1 2,620.935 1 0.6421 2,636.988 3 Total 2.6795 23.3900 17.5804 0.0269 1.4999 1.4999 1.4099 1.4099 0.0000 2,620.935 1 2,620.935 1 0.6421 2,636.988 3 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 12 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.4 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0977 2.6705 0.7370 5.6000e- 003 0.1408 0.0198 0.1606 0.0405 0.0189 0.0595 595.6642 595.6642 0.0448 596.7848 Worker 0.3222 0.2328 2.4975 6.3000e- 003 0.6148 4.9000e- 003 0.6197 0.1630 4.5200e- 003 0.1676 627.3736 627.3736 0.0214 627.9088 Total 0.4199 2.9033 3.2346 0.0119 0.7556 0.0247 0.7803 0.2036 0.0234 0.2270 1,223.037 7 1,223.037 7 0.0662 1,224.693 5 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3612 21.0788 17.1638 0.0269 1.2899 1.2899 1.2127 1.2127 2,591.580 2 2,591.580 2 0.6313 2,607.363 5 Total 2.3612 21.0788 17.1638 0.0269 1.2899 1.2899 1.2127 1.2127 2,591.580 2 2,591.580 2 0.6313 2,607.363 5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 13 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.4 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0886 2.5191 0.6777 5.5400e- 003 0.1408 0.0169 0.1577 0.0405 0.0162 0.0567 590.2958 590.2958 0.0432 591.3760 Worker 0.2933 0.2053 2.2296 6.1000e- 003 0.6148 4.7800e- 003 0.6196 0.1630 4.4100e- 003 0.1675 607.5607 607.5607 0.0190 608.0352 Total 0.3819 2.7244 2.9073 0.0116 0.7556 0.0217 0.7773 0.2036 0.0206 0.2242 1,197.856 5 1,197.856 5 0.0622 1,199.411 2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3612 21.0788 17.1638 0.0269 1.2899 1.2899 1.2127 1.2127 0.0000 2,591.580 2 2,591.580 2 0.6313 2,607.363 5 Total 2.3612 21.0788 17.1638 0.0269 1.2899 1.2899 1.2127 1.2127 0.0000 2,591.580 2 2,591.580 2 0.6313 2,607.363 5 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 14 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.4 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0886 2.5191 0.6777 5.5400e- 003 0.1408 0.0169 0.1577 0.0405 0.0162 0.0567 590.2958 590.2958 0.0432 591.3760 Worker 0.2933 0.2053 2.2296 6.1000e- 003 0.6148 4.7800e- 003 0.6196 0.1630 4.4100e- 003 0.1675 607.5607 607.5607 0.0190 608.0352 Total 0.3819 2.7244 2.9073 0.0116 0.7556 0.0217 0.7773 0.2036 0.0206 0.2242 1,197.856 5 1,197.856 5 0.0622 1,199.411 2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.2679 12.7604 12.3130 0.0189 0.7196 0.7196 0.6637 0.6637 1,843.319 1 1,843.319 1 0.5671 1,857.496 6 Paving 0.0859 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3538 12.7604 12.3130 0.0189 0.7196 0.7196 0.6637 0.6637 1,843.319 1 1,843.319 1 0.5671 1,857.496 6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 15 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.5 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1067 0.0747 0.8108 2.2200e- 003 0.2236 1.7400e- 003 0.2253 0.0593 1.6000e- 003 0.0609 220.9312 220.9312 6.9000e- 003 221.1037 Total 0.1067 0.0747 0.8108 2.2200e- 003 0.2236 1.7400e- 003 0.2253 0.0593 1.6000e- 003 0.0609 220.9312 220.9312 6.9000e- 003 221.1037 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.2679 12.7604 12.3130 0.0189 0.7196 0.7196 0.6637 0.6637 0.0000 1,843.319 1 1,843.319 1 0.5671 1,857.496 6 Paving 0.0859 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3538 12.7604 12.3130 0.0189 0.7196 0.7196 0.6637 0.6637 0.0000 1,843.319 1 1,843.319 1 0.5671 1,857.496 6 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 16 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.5 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1067 0.0747 0.8108 2.2200e- 003 0.2236 1.7400e- 003 0.2253 0.0593 1.6000e- 003 0.0609 220.9312 220.9312 6.9000e- 003 221.1037 Total 0.1067 0.0747 0.8108 2.2200e- 003 0.2236 1.7400e- 003 0.2253 0.0593 1.6000e- 003 0.0609 220.9312 220.9312 6.9000e- 003 221.1037 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 54.8666 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423 Total 55.1330 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 17 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 3.6 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0587 0.0411 0.4459 1.2200e- 003 0.1230 9.6000e- 004 0.1239 0.0326 8.8000e- 004 0.0335 121.5121 121.5121 3.8000e- 003 121.6070 Total 0.0587 0.0411 0.4459 1.2200e- 003 0.1230 9.6000e- 004 0.1239 0.0326 8.8000e- 004 0.0335 121.5121 121.5121 3.8000e- 003 121.6070 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 54.8666 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423 Total 55.1330 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 18 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.6 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0587 0.0411 0.4459 1.2200e- 003 0.1230 9.6000e- 004 0.1239 0.0326 8.8000e- 004 0.0335 121.5121 121.5121 3.8000e- 003 121.6070 Total 0.0587 0.0411 0.4459 1.2200e- 003 0.1230 9.6000e- 004 0.1239 0.0326 8.8000e- 004 0.0335 121.5121 121.5121 3.8000e- 003 121.6070 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 19 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 2.2543 11.4514 25.9254 0.0848 6.8148 0.0887 6.9035 1.8235 0.0832 1.9068 8,620.960 2 8,620.960 2 0.4773 8,632.893 1 Unmitigated 2.2543 11.4514 25.9254 0.0848 6.8148 0.0887 6.9035 1.8235 0.0832 1.9068 8,620.960 2 8,620.960 2 0.4773 8,632.893 1 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Hotel 1,339.88 1,343.16 975.80 3,074,193 3,074,193 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 1,339.88 1,343.16 975.80 3,074,193 3,074,193 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 Other Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Hotel 0.547828 0.043645 0.199892 0.122290 0.016774 0.005862 0.020637 0.032653 0.002037 0.001944 0.004777 0.000705 0.000956 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.547828 0.043645 0.199892 0.122290 0.016774 0.005862 0.020637 0.032653 0.002037 0.001944 0.004777 0.000705 0.000956 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 20 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 21 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Hotel 17469.7 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Hotel 17.4697 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.1884 1.7127 1.4387 0.0103 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 0.1302 2,055.262 3 2,055.262 3 0.0394 0.0377 2,067.475 7 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 22 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Exterior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior Use Low VOC Cleaning Supplies ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 2.9129 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Unmitigated 2.3754 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 23 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.2706 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 2.1032 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.5900e- 003 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Total 2.3754 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.2976 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 2.6136 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.5900e- 003 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Total 2.9129 1.6000e- 004 0.0169 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0359 0.0359 1.0000e- 004 0.0383 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 24 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 11.0 Vegetation 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 7/9/2018 3:09 PMPage 25 of 25 Jefferson Square Specific Plan 2018 Amendments - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -97- Appendix B Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Customized Soil Map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²0\RPDILQHVDQGWRSHUFHQWVORSHV 0D'²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ƒ  1 ƒ  :ƒ  1ƒ  :ƒ  1 ƒ  :ƒ  1 ƒ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²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²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²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efferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -98- Appendix C Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Geotechnical Engineering Investigation GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED JEFFERSON SQUARE JEFFERSON STREET AND FRED WARING DRY LA QUI NTA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT No.11.2-07036 MAY 25, 2007 PREPARED FOR: REGENCY CENTERS, INC. 36 EXECUTIVE PARK, SUITE 100 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614 ATTENTION. MR. THOMAS MIDDLETON PREPARED BY: KRAZAN & AssOCIATES, INC. 4221 BR]CKELL STREET ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA 91761 (909) 974-4400 Offices Serving the Western United States KdrlZ,n & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ■ ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION May 25, 2007 Mr. Thomas Middleton Regency Centers, Inc. 36 Executive Park, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92614 RE: Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Proposed Jefferson Square (Phase i) Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive La Quinta, California Dear Mr. Middleton: KA Project No. 112-07036 In accordance with your request and authorization, we have completed our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the above -referenced site. This report summarizes the results of our field investigation, laboratory testing and engineering analyses. Based on the data obtained, our understanding of the proposed project and our engineering analyses, it is our opinion that it is feasible to develop the site as planned. As noted in our report, Krazan & Associates should be retained to review project plans and specifications prior to the start of construction, and to observe and test earthwork and foundation construction. Observation and testing services should also be performed by our field staff during construction activities which will allow us to compare conditions exposed during construction with those encountered during our investigation and to present supplemental recommendations if warranted by different site conditions. If you have any questions regarding the information or recommendations presented in our report, or if we may be of further assistance, please contact our Ontario, California office at (909) 974-4400. Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. James M. Kellogg, PE Regional Manager cc: Addressee (4) Offices Serving The Western United States 4221 Brickell Street • Ontario, California 91761 • (909) 974-4400 • Fax: (909) 974-4022 11207036.doc f GEOTECBMCAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED JEFFERSON SQUARE LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION....................................................... .................................. ............................................ I PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES...............................................................................................I PROPOSEDCONSTRUCTION..............................................................................................................2 SITE LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION.....................................................................................2 SITEINVESTIGATION...........................................................................................................................3 GEOLOGICSETTING..................................................................................................................................3 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS.............................................................................................3 SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS........................................................................................4 GROUNDWATER........................................................................................................................................4 SEISMICITY, LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL AND SEISMIC INDUCED SETTLEMENT......................................5 SOILCORROSIVITY..............................................................................................................._...................5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................6 ADMINISTRATIVE SUMMARY... ............................................ ................................................................... 6 GROUNDWATER INFLUENCE ON STRUCTURES/CONSTRUCTION ..............................................................7 WEAK AND DISTURBED SOILS.................................................................................................................7 COLLAPSI13LESOILS.................................................................................................................................7 EARTHwoRK............................................................................................................................................7 Site Preparation — Clearing and Stripping........................................................................................... 7 Overexcavationand Recompaction..................................................................................................... 8 PillPlacement...................................................................................................................................... 8 ENGINEEREDFILL....................................................................................................................................8 TEMPORARY EXCAVATION STABILITY....................................................................................................9 UTILITYTRENCH BACKFILL.....................................................................................................................9 COMPACTED MATERIAL. ACCEPTANCE...................................................................................................9 SURFACE DRAINAGE AND LANDSCAPING..............................................................................................10 FLOOR SLABS AND EXTERIOR FLATWORK.............................................................................................10 FOUNDATIONS........................................................................................................................................1 1 RETAININGWALLS.................................................................................................................................11 PAVEMENTDESIGN................................................................................................................................12 SITECOEFFICIENT..................................................................................................................................13 SOILCORROSIVITY.................................................................................................................................13 TESTINGAND INSPECTION......................................................................................................................13 LIMITATIONS........................................................................................................................................14 VICINITYMAP........................................................................................................................... Figure I SITEPLAN................................................................................................................................... Figure 2 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS........................................................... Appendix A GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS............................................................... Appendix B GENERAL PAVEMENT SPECIFICATIONS.................................................................... Appendix C Offices Serving The Western United States 4221 Brickell Street • Ontario, Cal ifomia 91761 • (909) 974.4400 . Fax: (909) 974-4022 1120703G.doe �KraZMmllv & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION May 25, 2007 ITYMODUCTION KA Project No. 112-07036 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED JEFFERSON SQUARE JEFFERSON STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA Tlvs report presents the results of our Geoteciuucal Engineering Investigation for the proposed Jefferson Square shopping center (Phase 1) in La Quinta, California. Discussions regarding site conditions are presented herein, together with conclusions and recommendations pertaining to site preparation, grading, utility trench backfill, drainage and landscaping, foundations, concrete floor slabs and exterior concrete flatwork, retaining walls, soil corrosivity, and pavement design. A Vicinity Map showing the location of the site is presented on Figure 1. A Site Plan showing the approximate boring locations is presented on Figure 2. Descriptions of the field and laboratory investigations, boring log legend and boring logs are presented in Appendix A. Appendices B and C contain guides for general earthwork and flexible pavement specifications. If conflicts in the text of the report occur with the general specifications in the appendices, the recommendations in the text of the report have precedence. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES This geotechnical investigation was conducted to evaluate subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the project site. Engineering analysis of the field and laboratory data was performed for the purpose of developing and providing geotechnical recommendations for use in the preliminary design and construction of the earthwork, foundation and pavement aspects of the project. Our scope of services was outlined in our proposal dated May 1, 2007 (KA Proposal No. P 112049-07) and included the following: • A site reconnaissance by a member of our engineering staff to evaluate the surface conditions at the project site. • Review of selected published geologic Wraps, reports and literature pertinent to the site and surrounding area. Offices Serving ne Western United States 4221 Brickell Street + Ontario, Cali Fornia 91761 • (909) 974-4400 • Fax: (949) 974-4022 i 1207036.doc KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 2 • A field investigation consisting of drilling sixteen (16) borings to depths of 11 to 51 feet below the existing ground surface for evaluation of the subsurface conditions at the project site. • Performing laboratory tests on representative soil samples obtained from the borings to evaluate the physical and index properties of the subsurface soils. • Evaluation of the data obtained from the investigation and engineering analyses of the data with respect to the geotechnical aspects of structural design, and site grading and paving. • Preparation of this report summarizing the results, conclusions, recommendations, and findings of our investigation. Environmental services, such as chenucal analyses of soil and groundwater for possible environniental contaminates, and geologic study were not in ater scope of services. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We understand that design of the proposed development is currently underway; structural load information and other final details pertaining to the structures are therefore unavailable. On a preliminary basis, it is understood that the project will include construction of a retail shopping center named Jefferson Square (Phase 1). The shopping center will consist of a market, a drug store, two shops and two pads ranging in footprints from 4,500 to 13,900 square feet. The buildings are planned to be of one story wood frame/stucco or masonry construction with concrete slab -on -grade floors. Building loads are anticipated to be relatively light. Onsite parking and landscaping are also planned for the development. Mass grading of the majority of the site is expected to entail minor to moderate cuts and fills from existing grades to establish building pads and to provide for surface drainage of the site. In the event these structural or grading details are inconsistent with the final design criteria, we should be notified so that we can evaluate the potential impacts of the changes on the recortunendations presented in this report and provide an updated report as necessary. SITE LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION The site is rectangular in shape and encompasses approximately 8.44 acres. The site is located on the southwest comer of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive in the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The site is predominately surrounded by residential developments and park/golf course lands. Presently, the site is vacant with sparse weeds and shrubs. A scoured wash is located at the northeast corner of the site with a relief of approximately 4 to 6 feet. The remaining site is relatively fiat with no major changes in grade. The average elevation of the site is approximately 60 feet above mean sea level. Krazan & Associates, Inc, Offices Serving The Western United States 11207036_doe KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 3 SITE INVESTIGATION GEOLOGIC SETTING Regionally the proposed site is situated at the base of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains within the northwest portion of the Coachella Valley of Southern California. Near -surface material consists of alluvial fan deposits of sand, silt, gravel, and cobbles derived from erosion of the Mesozoic granitic and metamorphic rocks of the adjacent San Jacinto Mountains. A significant feature within this geomorphic province is the Salton Trough. The Salton Trough is a large northwest -trending structural depression that extends from the San Gorgonio Pass to the Gulf of California. A large portion of this depression in the vicinity of the Salton Sea is below sea level. The Coachella Valley forms the northerly portion of the Salton Trough and contains a thick sequence of sedimentary deposits that are Miocene to Recent in age. Mountains surrounding the Coachella Valley include the Little San Bernardino Mountains to the northeast, foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains to the northwest, and the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains to the southwest. These mountains expose primarily Precambrian metamorphic and Mesozoic granitic rocks. Tectonism of the region is dominated by the interaction of the East Pacific Plate and the North American Plate along a transform boundary. The Coachella Valley has been filled with a variable thickness of relatively young, heterogeneous alluvial deposits. The Coachella Valley in the vicinity of the project site is drained by nunor tributaries toward the Whitewater River, which is located approximately three miles southwest of the subject site. This drainage system trends towards the southeast in the vicinity of the subject site. Depth to groundwater in the vicinity of the subject site is reported to be approximately 100 feet below ground surface with a general direction of flow towards the southeast. Numerous moderate to large earthquakes have affected the area of the subject site within historic time. Based on the proximity of several dominant active faults and seismogenic structures, as well as the historic seismic record, the area of.the subject site is considered subject to relatively high seismicity. The seismic hazard most likely to impact the site is groundshaking due to a large earthquake on one of the major active regional faults. The San Andreas — Southern fault is the nearest active fault to the site and located approximately 6.3 kilometers northeast of the project site. The Burnt Mountain, Eureka Peak and San Jacinto — Anza faults are located approximately 26, 27.3, and 36.8 kilometers from the site, respectively. The subject site is located in Seismic Zone 4 as defined by the California Building Code. FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Subsurface soil conditions were explored by drilling sixteen (16) borings, using a truck -mounted drill rig, to deptlis ranging from approximately 11 to 51 feet below existing site grade. The approximate boring locations are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. These approximate boring locations were estimated hi the field based on pacing and measuring from the limits of existing site features. During drilling operations, penetration tests were performed at regular intervals to evaluate the soil consistency and to obtain inforination regarding the engineering properties of the subsurface soils. Soil samples were retained for Iaboratory testing. The soils encountered were continuously examined and visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. A more detailed description of the field investigation is presented in Appendix A. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States Ii207036.doc KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 4 Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to evaluate their physical characteristics and engineering properties. The laboratory -testing program was formulated with emphasis on the evaluation of in -situ moisture and dry density, gradation, shear strength, consolidation, R-value, maximum dry density, resistivity, sulfate and chloride of the materials encountered. Details of the laboratory -testing program are discussed in Appendix A. The results of the laboratory tests are presented on the boring logs or on the test reports, which are also included in Appendix A. This information, along with the field observations, was used to prepare the final boring logs in Appendix A. SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Based on our findings, the subsurface conditions encountered appear typical of those found in the geologic region of the site. In general, the subsurface soils consisted of 1 to 3 feet of loose/disturbed silty sands and sands underlain by denser alluvial deposits. The upper soils are disturbed, have low strength characteristics, and are higl-dy compressible when saturated. Below the loose/disturbed upper soils, denser silty sands, sands and silts were encountered. Field and laboratory tests suggest that the deeper native soils are moderately strong and slightly compressible. Penetration resistance, measured by the number of blows required to drive a Modified California sampler or a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler, ranged from 7 to 54 blows per foot. Dry densities ranged from 90.8 to 112.6 pounds per cubic feet (pcf). Representative soil samples had angles of internal friction of 32 to 37 degrees. Representative soil samples consolidated approximately 0.7 to 1.7 percent under a 2-ksf load when saturated. Reprehensive soil samples had R-values of 52.to 58, maximum dry densities of 110 to 119 pcf and an Expansion Index of 0. One boring, Boring B-1, was advanced to a depth of 50 feet to obtain additional information for use in liquefaction potential evaluation. The profile is consistent with the majority of the borings drilled during this study. The above is a general description of soil conditions encountered at the site in the borings drilled for this investigation, For a more detailed description of the soil conditions encountered, please refer to the boring logs in Appendix A. GROUNDWATER Test boring locations were checked for the presence of groundwater during and after the drilling operations. Groundwater was not encountered at the time of this investigation. It should be recognized that water table elevation might fluctuate with time. The depth to groundwater can be expected to fluctuate both seasonally and from year to year. Fluctuations in die groundwater level may occur due to variations in precipitation, irrigation practices at the site and in the surrounding areas, climatic conditions, flow in adjacent or nearby canals, pumping from wells and possibly as the result of other factors that were not evident at the time of our investigation. Therefore, water level observations at the time of our field investigation may vary from those encountered during the construction phase of the project. The evaluation of such factors is beyond the scope of this report. Long-term monitoring in observation wells, sealed from the influence of surface water, is often required to more accurately define the potential range of groundwater conditions on a site. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The western Uniled States i 1207036.doc KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 5 SEISMICITY, LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL AND SEISMIC INDUCED SETTLEMENT Seismicity is a general term relating to the abrupt release of accumulated strain energy in the rock materials of the eartlA crust in a given geographical area. The recurrence of accumulation and subsequent release of strain have resulted in faults and fault systems. Fault patterns and density reflect relative degrees of regional stress through time, but do not necessarily indicate recent seismic activity; therefore, the degree of seismic risk must be determined or estimated by the seismic record in any given region. Soil liquefaction is a state of soil particle suspension caused by a complete loss of strength when the effective stress drops to zero. Liquefaction normally occurs under saturated conditions in soils such as sand in which the strength is purely frictional. However, liquefaction has occurred in soils other than clean sand. Liquefaction usually occurs under vibratory conditions such as those induced by seismic events. To evaluate the liquefaction potential of the site, the following items were evaluated: 1) Soil type 2) Groundwater depth 3) Relative density 4) Initial confining pressure 5) Intensity and duration of ground shaking The soils beneath the site consist predominately of dense and stiff materials. Groundwater is expected to be a depth of greater than 50 feet. The potential for liquefaction is considered to be low based on the absence of shallow groundwater and the relatively dense and stiff materials underlying the site. One of the most common phenomena during seismic shafting accompanying any earthquake is the induced settlement of loose unconsolidated soils. Based on site subsurface conditions and the moderate to high seismicity of the region, any Ioose granular materials at the site could be vulnerable to this potential hazard. Our analysis of dynamic densification of "dry" soil above the water table in the upper 50 feet of existing soil profile was performed. The seismic densification of dry to damp alluvial sandy soils due to onsite seismic activity is calculated to have total settlements of approximately 2 to 3 inches. To reduce the effects and magnitude of the seisnvc induced settlements, remedial grading is recommended, as discussed later in this report. Following completion of the recommended remedial grading and foundation design, we estimate that differential settlements of approximately �/_ inch in 20 feet laterally may result from seismic densification. SOIL CORROSIVITY Corrosion tests were performed to evaluate the soil corrosivity to the buried structures. The results of the tests are included as follows: Par$�pneter Results .. Test;Mt ttid" d Resistivity 12,500 ehms-cm Caltrans Sulfate Less than 5 mglkg EPA 903E Chloride 23A mg/kg EPA 9253 PH 9.02 EPA 9045C Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United Slates 11207036.doe KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the findings of our field and laboratory investigations, along with previous geotechnical experience in the project area, the following is a summary of our evaluations, conclusions, and recommendations. ADMINISTRATIVE SUMMARY Based on the data collected during this investigation, and from a geotechnical engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the proposed development is feasible as presently anticipated provided that the recommendations presented in this report are considered in the design and construction of the project. In brief, the subject site and soil conditions, with the exception of the upper loose/collapsible soils and seismic induced settlement, appear to be conducive to the development of the project. Undoctunented fill materials may be present onsite between our exploratory borehole locations. In general, these fill soils should be assumed uncompacted and unsuitable for support of foundations and pavements. These fill soils if encountered during grading should also be overexcavated and recompacted. The upper loose soils within the project site are moderately compressible under saturated conditions. Accordingly, initigation measures are recortunended to reduce potential excessive soil settlement. Recommendations pertaining to the removal and recompaction of these moisture -sensitive soils are presented herein. After completion of the recommended site preparation, the site should be suitable for shallow footing support. Sandy soil conditions were encountered at the site. These cohesionless soils have a tendency to cave in trench wall excavations. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these loose cobesionless soils. Due to the lack of fines for the onsite cohesionless soils, it is recommended that the subgrade and fill soils be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM D1557-00 Test Method. The shrinkage on recompacted soil and fill placement is estimated at 15 to 20 percent. This value is an estimate and may vary significantly depending on several items including soil conditions, compaction effort, weather, etc. Subsidence within building areas will be less than 0.02 foot, due to the recommended over -excavation. Subsidence within parking areas, below the 12-inch recompaction depth, is estimated at 0.05 foot. All grading and- earthwork should be performed in accordance with the Grading Ordinances of the City of La Quinta and the applicable portions of the General Earthwork Specifications in Appendix B, except as modified herein. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Westem llttited States 11207036.doc KA No. 1 I2-07036 Page No. 7 GROUNDWATER INFLUENCE ON STRUCTURES/CONSTRUCTION Based on our findings and historical records, it is not anticipated that groundwater will rise within the zone of structural influence or affect the construction of foundations and pavements for the project. However, if earthwork is performed during or soon after periods of precipitation, the subgrade soils may become saturated, "pump," or not respond to densifieation techniques. Typical remedial measures include discing and aerating the soil during dry weather; mixing the soil with dryer materials; removing and replacing the soil with an approved fill material; or mixing the soil with an approved lime or cement product. Our firm should be consulted prior to implementing remedial measures to observe the unstable subgrade conditions and provide appropriate recommendations. WE, AND DISTURBED SOILS Of primary importance in the development of this site is the removal/recompaction of potentially compressible soils from the areas of the proposed structures. This is discussed in detail in the Earthwork section of this report. COLLAPSIBLE SOILS The upper onsite native soils are moisture -sensitive and are moderately compressible under saturated conditions. Structures within the project vicinity have experienced excessive post -construction settlement, when the foundation soils become near saturated. As recommended in the site preparation section of this report, the collapsible soils should be removed and recompacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM D1557-00 Test Method. EARTHWORK Site Preparation — Clearing and Stripping General site clearing should include removal of vegetation and existing utilities, structures, trees and associated root systems rubble, rubbish, and any loose and/or saturated materials. Site stripping should extend to a minimum depth of 2 to 4 inches, or until all organics in excess of 3 percent by volume are removed. Deeper stripping may be required in localized areas. These materials will not be suitable for reuse as Engineered Fill. However, stripped topsoil may be stockpiled and reused in landscape or non- structural areas with the approval of the owner and landscaper. Any excavations that result from clearing operations should be backfilled with engineered fill. Krazan & Associates' field staff should be present during site clearing operations to enable us to locate areas where depressions or disturbed soils are present and to allow our staff to observe and test the backfill as it is placed. If site clearing and backfilling operations occur without appropriate observation and testing by a qualified geotechnieal consultant, there may be .the need to over -excavate the building area to identify uncontrolled fills prior to mass grading of the building pad. As with site clearing operations, any buried structures encountered during construction should be properly removed and backfilled. The resulting excavations should be back -filled with engineered fill. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 11207036_doe KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 8 Overexcavation and Recompaction Building Pad Areas To minimize post -construction soil movement and provide uniform support for the proposed .buildings, overexcavation and recompaction within the proposed building footprints should be performed to a minimum depth of five (5) feet below existing grade or four (4) feet below bottom of the proposed footings, whichever is deeper. The actual depth of overexcavation should be determined by our field representative during grading. The overexcavation and recompaction should also extend laterally 5 feet beyond the edges of the proposed footings. Any undocumented fill encountered during grading should be removed and replaced with engineered fill. Pavement Areas Within the pavement areas, it is recommended that overexcavation .and recompaction should be performed to at least 12 inches below existing grade or finish grade, whichever is deeper. This compaction effort should stabilize the surface soils and locate any unsuitable or pliant areas not found during our field investigation. The actual depth of the overexcavation and recompaction should be determined by our field representative during construction. Fill Placement Prior to placement of fill soils, the upper 8 inches of native subgrade soils should be scarified, moisture - conditioned to no less than the optimum moisture content, and recompacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM D1557-00 Test Method. Fill soils should be placed in loose lifts approximately 6 to 8 inches thick, moisture -conditioned to near optimum moisture content (f2°/u), and compacted to achieve at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557-00 Test Method. Additional lifts should not be placed if the previous lift did not meet the required dry density or if soil conditions are not stable. The upper soils, during wet winter months, may become very moist due to the absorptive characteristics of the soil. Earthwork operations performed during winter months may encounter very moist unstable soils, which may require removal to grade a stable building foundation. Project site winterization consisting of placement of aggregate base and protecting exposed soils during the construction phase should be performed. ENGINEERED FILL The upper organic -free, on -site, native soils are predominately silty sands and sands. These soils will be suitable for reuse as non -expansive Engineered Fill, provided they are cleansed of excessive organics and debris. The preferred materials specified for Engineered Fill are suitable for most applications with the exception of exposure to erosion. Project site winterization and protection of exposed soils during the Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western united States 11207036.doe KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 4 construction phase should be the sole responsibility of the contractor, since he has complete control of the project site at that time. Imported Fill material should be predominately non -expansive granular materials with a plasticity index less than 10, an Expansion Index less than 20 and 10 to 40 percent passing No. 200 sieve. Imported Fill should be free from rocks and clods greater than 4 inches in diameter. All imported Fill material should be submitted to the Soils Engineer for approval at least 48 hours prior to delivery at the site. TEMPORARY EXCAVATION STABILITY All excavations should comply with the current OSHA requirements. All cuts greater than 2 feet in depth should be sloped or shored. Temporary excavations should be sloped at 1 `1i:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter up to a maximum depth of 8 feet below surrounding grade. Heavy construction equipment, building materials, excavated soil, and vehicular traffic should not be allowed within five (5) feet of the top (edge) of the excavation. Where sloped excavations are not feasible due to site constraints, the excavations may require shoring. The design of the shoring system is normally the responsibility of the contractor or shoring designer, and therefore, is outside the scope of this report. The design of the temporary shoring should take into account lateral pressures exerted by the adjacent soil, and, where anticipated, surcharge loads due to adjacent buildings and any construction equipment or traffic expected to operate alongside the excavation. The excavation/shoring recommendations provided herein are based on soil characteristics derived from our test borings within the area. Variations in soil conditions will likely be encountered during the excavations. Krazan & Associates, Inc. should be afforded the opportunity to provide field review to evaluate the actual conditions and account for field condition variations, not otherwise anticipated in the preparation of this recommendation. UTILITY TRENCH 13ACKFILL Sandy soil conditions were encountered at the site. These cohesionless soils have a tendency to cave in trench wall excavations. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these sandy soils. Utility trench bacl¢ill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM D 1557-00 Test Method. Pipe bedding should be placed in accordance with pipe manufacturer recommendations. Depending upon the location and depth of some utility trenches, water flows into open excavations could be experienced, especially during or following periods of precipitation. The contractor is responsible for removing all water -sensitive soils from the trench regardless of the backfiIl location and compaction requirements. The contractor should use appropriate equipment and methods to avoid damage to the utilities and/or structures during fill placement and compaction. COMPACTED MATERIAL ACCEPTANCE Compaction specifications are not the only criteria for acceptance of the site grading or other such activities. However, the compaction test is the most universally recognized test method for assessing the performance of the Grading Contractor. The numerical test results from the compaction test cannot be Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Sming The Western United States 11247036.doc KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 10 solely used to predict the engineering performance of the compacted material. Therefore, the acceptance of compacted materials will also be dependent on the moisture content and the stability of that material. The Geotechnical Engineer has the option of rejecting any compacted material regardless of the degree of compaction if that material is considered to be too dry or excessively wet, unstable or if future instability is suspected. A specific example of rejection of fill material passing the rewired percent compaction is a fill which has been compacted with in -situ moisture content significantly less than optimum moisture. Where expansive soils are present, heaving of the soils may occur with the introduction of water. Where the material is a lean clay or silt, this type of dry fill (brittle fill) is susceptible to future settlement if it becomes saturated or flooded. SURFACE DRAINAGE AND LANDSCAPING The ground surface should slope away from building and pavement areas toward appropriate drop inlets or other surface drainage devices. We recommended that adjacent paved exterior grades be sloped a minimum of 2 percent for a minimum distance of 5 feet away from structures. Ideally, asphalt concrete pavement areas should be sloped at a minimum of 2 percent, with Portland cement concrete sloped at a minimum of one percent toward drainage structures. These grades should be maintauaed for the life of the project. Roof drains should be designed.to avoid discharging into landscape areas adjacent to the building. Downspouts should be directed to discharge directly onto paved surfaces to allow for surface drainage into the storm systems or should be connected directly to the on -site storm drain. FLOOR SLABS AND EXTERIOR FLATWORK Concrete slab -on -grade floors should be underlain by a water vapor retarder. The water vapor retarder should be installed in accordance with ASTM Specification E 1643-98. According to ASTM Guidelines, the water vapor retarder should consist of a vapor retarder sheeting underlain by a minimum of 3 inches of compacted, clean, gravel of 1/-inch maximum size. To aide in concrete curing 2 to 4 inches of granular fill may be placed on top of the vapor retarder. The granular fill should consist of damp clean sand with at least 10 to 30 percent of the sand passing the No. 100 sieve. The sand should be free of clay, silt or organic material. Rock dust which is manufactured sand from rock crushing operations is typically suitable for the granular fill. This granularfill material should be compacted. The exterior floors should be poured separately in order to act independently of the walls and foundation system. All fills required to bring the building pads to grade should be Engineered Fills_ Moisture within the structure may be derived from water vapors, which were transformed from the moisture within the soils. This moisture vapor can travel through the vapor membrane and penetrate the slab -on -grade. This moisture vapor penetration can affect floor coverings and produce mold and mildew in the structure. To minimize moisture vapor intrusion, it is recommended that a vapor retarder be installed in accordance with ASTM guidelines. It is recorrunended that the utility trenches within the structure be compacted, as specified in our report, to minimize the transmission of moisture through the utility trench backfill. Special attention to the immediate drainage and irrigation around the building is recommended. Positive drainage should be established away from the structure and should be Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving rye Western United States 11207036.dac IAA No. 112-07036 Page No. 11 maintained throughout the life of the structure_ Ponding of water should not be allowed adjacent to the structure. Over --irrigation within landscaped areas adjacent to the structure should not be performed. In addition, ventilation of the structure (i.e. ventilation fans) is recommended to reduce the accumulation of interior moisture. FOUNDATIONS Provided that the site is prepared as recommended, the proposed structures may be supported on a shallow foundation system bearing on at least 4 feet of Engineered Fill. Spread and continuous footings can be designed for the following maximum allowable soil bearing pressures: Dead Load Only 2,500 psf Dead -Plus -Live Load 3,000 psf Total Load, including Nvind or seismic loads 4,000 psf The footings should have a minimum depth of 1$ inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or adjacent exterior grade, whichever is deeper. Footings should have minimum widths of 15 inches for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated pad footings. The footing excavations should not be allowed to dry out any time prior to pouring concrete. It is recommended that footings be reinforced with at least one No. 5 reinforcing rebar in both top and bottom. Provided the site is prepared as recommended and that the foundations are designed and constructed in accordance with our recommendations, the total settlement due to static foundation loads is not expected to exceed 1 inch. The differential settlements are anticipated to be less than %z inch in 40 feet due to static loading. Most of the settlement is expected to occur during construction as the loads are applied. However, additional post -construction settlement may occur if the foundations soils are flooded or saturated. The seismic induced differential settlements are anticipated to be less than '/a inch in 20 feet due to a strong earthquake event. Resistance to Iateral footing displacement can be computed using an allowable friction factor of 0.45 acting between the base of foundations and the supporting subgrade. Lateral resistance for footings can alternatively be developed using an allowable equivalent fluid passive pressure of 400 pounds per cubic foot acting against the appropriate vertical footing faces. The frictional and passive resistance of the soil may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. A one-third increase in the above value may be used for short duration, wind, or seismic loads. RETAINING WALLS Walls retaining horizontal backfill and capable oFdeflecting a minimum of 0.1 percent of its height at the top may be designed using an equivalent fluid active pressure of 32 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Walls that are incapable of this deflection or walls that are fully constrained against deflection may be designed for an equivalent fluid at -rest pressure of 52 pounds per square foot per foot per depth. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Seeing The Westem United States 1 1207036.doc KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 12 Expansive soils should not be used for backfill against walls. The wedge of non -expansive backfiIl. material should extend from the bottom of each retaining wall outward and upward at a slope of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. The wall backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM D1557-00 Test Method. The active and at -rest earth pressures do not include hydrostatic pressures. To reduce the build-up of hydrostatic pressures, drainage should be provided behind the retaining walls. Wall drain should consist of a minimum 12-inch wide zone of drainage material, such as 3/4-inch by 1/2-inch drain rock wrapped in a non -woven polypropylene geotextile filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent. Alternatively, drainage may be provided by the placement of a commercially produced composite drainage blanket, such as Miradrain, extending continuously up from the base of the wall. The drainage material should extend from the base of the wall to finished subgrade in paved areas and to within about 12 inches below the top of the wall in landscape areas. In landscape areas the top 12 inches should be backfilled with compacted native soil. A 4-inch minimum diameter, perforated, Schedule 40 PVC drain pipe should be placed with holes facing down in the lower portion of the wall drainage material, surrounded with drain rock wrapped in filter fabric. A solid drainpipe leading to a suitable discharge point should provide drainage outlet. As an alternative, weep holes may be used to provide drainage. If weep holes are used the weep holes should be 3 inches in diameter and spaced about S feet on centers. The backside of the weep holes should be covered with a corrosion -resistant mesh to prevent loss of backfill and/or drainage material. PAVEMENT DESIGN Based on our laboratory test results, an R-value of 52 is used for the pavement design. If site grading exposes soil other than that assumed, we should perform additional tests to confirm or revise the recommended pavement sections for actual field conditions. The following table shows the recommended pavement sections for various traffic indices. Traffic:Index " `As laltie:Concrete ; � .Class 2`A. �. a ateBase* ,; :. �Coin� acted°°Bulb . ade* ..;': 5.0 2.5" 4.0" 12.0" 6.0 3.0" 4.0" 12.0" 7.0 4.0" 4.0" 12.0" * 95% eonipacdoir based on ASTM 01557 Test Atediod or CAL 216 If traffic indices are not available, an estimated (typical value) index of 5.0 may be used for automobile parking and an index of 7.0 may be used for light truck traffic. We recommend that the subgrade. soil be prepared as discussed in this report. The compacted subgrade should be non -yielding when proof -rolled with a loaded ten -wheel truck, such as a water truck or dump truck, prior to pavement construction. Subgrade preparation should extend a minimum of 2 feet laterally behind the edge of pavement or back of curbs. Pavement areas should be sloped and drainage gradients maintained to carry all surface water off the site. A cross slope of 2 percent is recommended in asphalt concrete pavement areas to provide good surface drainage and to reduce the potential for water to penetrate into the pavement structure. Unless otherwise required by local jurisdictions, paving materials should comply with the materials specifications presented in the Caltrans Standard Specifications Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving nic Western United States 11207036.doc KA No. 1 I2-07036 Page No. 13 Section. Class 2 aggregate should comply with the materials requirements for Class 2 base found in Section 26. SITE COEFFICIENT The site coefficient, per Table 16-J, California Building Code, is based upon the site soil conditions. It is our opinion that a site coefficient of soil type Sp is appropriate for building design at this site. For seismic design of the structures, in accordance with the seismic provisions of the California Building Code, we recommend the following parameters: .S.eis�c Item ,;� >_; .Value .. _.....n CBC,Reference Zone Factor 0.4 Table 16-I Source Type A Table 16-U Coefficient N. 1.1 Table 16-S Coefficient N, 1.5 Table 16-T Coefficient Ca 0.51 Table 16-Q Coefficient C„ 0.96 Table 16-R SOIL CORROSIVITY Excessive sulfate or chloride in either the soil 'or native water may result in an adverse reaction between the cement in concrete and the soil. California Building Code has developed criteria for evaluation of sulfate and chloride levels and how they relate to cement reactivity with soil and/or water. The soil samples from the subject site were tested to have a low sulfate and chloride concentrations. Therefore, no special design requirements are necessary to compensate for sulfate or chloride reactivity with the cement. Electrical resistivity testing of the soil indicates that the onsite soils may have a mild potential for metal loss from electrochemical corrosion process. A qualified corrosion engineer should be consulted regarding the corrosion effects of the onsite soils on underground metal utilities. Additional chemical testing should be performed for each building pad after grading to verify the soil corrosivity condition and revised recommendations will be provided according. TESTING AND INSPECTION A representative of Krazan & Associates, Inc. should be present at the site during the earthwork activities to confirm that actual subsurface conditions are consistent with the exploratory Fieldwork. This activity is an integral part of our service, as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction testing and stability of the material. This representative can also verify that the intent of these recommendations is incorporated into the project design and construction. Krazan & Associates, Inc. will not be responsible for grades or staking, since this is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The western United States 11207036.da: KA No, 112-07036 Page No. 14 LIMITATIONS Geotechnical Engineering is one of the newest divisions of Civil Engineering. This branch of Civil Engineering is constantly improving as new technologies and understanding of earth sciences advance. Although your site was analyzed using appropriate and current techniques and methods, undoubtedly there will be substantial future improvements in this branch of engineering. In addition to advancements in the field of Geotechnical Engineering, physical changes in the site due to site clearing or grading activities, new agency regulations, or possible changes in the proposed structure or development after issuance of this report will result in the need for professional review of this report. Updating or revisions to the recommendations report, and possibly additional study of the site may be required at that time. In light of this, the Owner should be aware that there is a practical limit to the usefulness of this report without critical review. Although the time limit for this review is strictly arbitrary, it is suggested that two years be considered a reasonable time for the usefulness of this report. Foundation and earthwork construction is characterized by the presence of a calculated risk that soil and groundwater conditions have been fully revealed by the original foundation investigation. This risk is derived from the practical necessity of basing interpretations and design conclusions on limited sampling of the earth. The recommendations made in this report are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not vary significantly from those disclosed during our field investigation. The logs of the exploratory borings do not provide a warranty as to the conditions that may exist beneath the entire site. The extent and nature of subsurface soil and groundwater variations may not become evident until construction begins. It is possible that variations in soil conditions and depth to groundwater could exist beyond the points of exploration that may require additional studies, consultation, and possible design revisions. If conditions are encountered in the field during construction, which differ from those described in this report, our firm should be contacted immediately to provide any necessary revisions to these recommendations. This report presents the results of our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, which was conducted for the purpose of evaluating the soil conditions in terms of foundation and retaining wall design, and grading and paving of the site. This report does not include reporting of any services related to envirom-rental studies conducted to assessment the presence or absence of hazardous and/or toxic materials in the soil, groundwater, or atmosphere, or the presence of wetlands. Any statements in this report or on any boring log regarding odors, unusual or suspicious items, or conditions observed, are strictly for descriptive purposes and are not intended to convey professional judgment regarding the presence of potential hazardous or toxics substances. Conversely, the absence of statements in this report or on any boring log regarding odors, unusual or suspicious items, or conditions observed, does not constitute our rendering professional judgment regarding the absence of potentially hazardous or toxics substances. The conclusions of this report are based on the information provided regarding the proposed construction. We emphasize that this report is valid for the project as described in the text of this report and it should not be used for any other sites or projects. The geotechnical engineering information presented herein is based upon our understanding of the proposed project and professional interpretation of the data obtained in our studies of the site. It is not warranted that such information and interpretation cannot be superseded by future geotechnical engineering developments. The Geotechnical Engineer Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 11207036.doc KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 15 should be notified of any changes to the proposed project so the recommendations may be reviewed and re-evaluated. The work conducted through the course of this investigation, including the preparation of this report, has been performed in accordance with the generally accepted standards of geotechnicai engineering practice, which existed in geographic area of the project at the time the report was written. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. This report is issued with the understanding that the owner chooses the risk they wish to hear by the expenditures involved with the construction alternatives and scheduling that are chosen. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (909) 974-4400. Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Clarence Jiang, GE Project Manager A.G.E. No. 2477 CJ/JMK:rm James M. Kellogg, PE Regional Manager A.C.E. No, 65092 Krazaa & Associates, line. Offices Serving The Westem United States 11207936.dco 7 Bermuda Dunes Airpo r u n �V '� 42 —JLn o f 11 u :3aae�cj - w b BkRWUbA DUNES 33 ra � �• Q u�'i i"t i• ', C t. ii!� �♦ - • , , `s - - • \ �?oas== Siphcn' A i r Id J l _ I ' - •11R` ,F ram_"'s r�` i` f' '. V Y SITE _ max. JL Trailer park ___ Welle v•C.�JJ,�a 2' . at 4. rtr E6 r --^� 7 m,—: N. � � �� Z.� I � � .. i _ _ 4 •� _.s ' Fo j -�,� i E33.'dir�;i — Cj «rz=_s' — --�rC. 46 Tffm i{� Jam{ r _N' 7 1 7 iff € l I 17 i as i, t hail r Pafk ---- r~�"•. Trailer K Park tl 0 ' IS Scale+ PROPOSED JEFFERSON SQUARE 1:24,000 fln4e. MAY 2007 er Approved er LA QUINTA, CA nrn.n RM CT -1%�K=an SITE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS Offices Serving the Western United States VICINITY MAP �� �. 112-07036 �� ME 1 d d 0— u L L 0 m am I L i Li ry Z U cy. APPENDIX A FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Field Investigation Our field investigation consisted of a surface reconnaissance and a subsurface exploration program consisted of excavating, drilling, logging and sampling a total of 16 borings. Drilling was performed using a Simco 2800 drill rig. The depths of exploration ranged from about 11 feet to 51 feet below the existing site surface. A member of our staff visually classified the soils in the field as the excavating and drilling progressed and recorded a c ontinuous 1 og o f e ach b oring. V isuaI c lassification o f the s oils a ncountered i n o ur exploratory borings was made in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487). During drilling operations, penetration tests were performed at regular intervals to evaluate the soil consistency and to obtain information regarding the engineering properties of the subsurface soils. Samples were obtained from the borings by driving either a 2.5-inch inside diameter Modified California tube sampler fitted with brass sleeves or a 2-inch outside diameter, 1-3/8-inch inside diameter Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler without sleeves. Soil samples were retained for possible laboratory testing. The samplers were driven up to a depth of 18 inches into the underlying soil using a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler was recorded for each 6-inch penetration interval and the number of blows required driving the sampler the last 12 inches are shown as blows per foot on the boring logs. The approximate locations of our borings are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. These approximate locations were estimated by our staff in the field based on pacing and the limits of existing site features, Laboratory Investigation The laboratory investigation was programmed to determine the physical and mechanical properties of the soil underlying the site. The laboratory -testing program was formulated with emphasis on the evaluation of in -situ moisture, density, gradation, shear strength, consolidation and expansion potential, and R-value of the materials encountered. In addition, chemical tests were performed to evaluate the soil/cement reactivity and corrosivity. Test results were used in our engineering analysis with respect to site and building pad preparation through mass grading activities, foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, pavement section design, evaluation of the materials as possible fill materials and for possible exclusion of some soils from use at the structures as fill or bacicfiil. Krazan & Associates, inc. Offices Serving The western United States 1 I 267036_doe ratan & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND SYMBOL CHART COARSE -GRAINED SOILS (more than 50% of material is larger than No. 200 sieve size.) Clean Gravels (Less than 5°% fines) C'w Well -graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines `a GRAVELS � GP Poorly -graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines More than 50% of coarse 29, fraction larger than No. 4 Gravels with fines More than 12% fines sieve size GM Silty gravels, gravel -sand -silt mixtures GC Clayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay mixtures Clean Sands Less than 5°% fines SWesl or Wall -graded gravelly sands, littlSANDS :: sp Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines 5096 or more of coarse traction smaller than No. 4 Sands with fines More than 12% fines sieve size SM Silty sands, sand -sift mixtures SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures FINE-GRAINED SOILS (50% or more of material Is smaller than No. 200 sieve size.) Inorganic slits and very fine sands, rock SILTS AND ML flour, silty of clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity Inorganic clays of law to medlum CLAYS Liquid limit less than CL plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays 150% T OL Organic sits and organic silty clays of low plasticity Inorganic slits, micaceous or SILTS MH dlatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic slits AND CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays CLAYS Liquid limit 50% OH Organic clays of medlum to high Plasticity, organic slits or greater HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS `+ +, a PT Peat and other highly organic soils CONSISTENCY CLASSMCATION Description Slows per Foot Granular Soils Very Loose < 5 Loose 5 —15 Medium Dense 16 — 40 Dense 41 — 65 Very Dense > 65 Cohesive Soils Very Soft < 3 Soft 3-5 Firm 6-10 Stiff 11— 20 Very Stiff 21— 40 Hard > 40 GRAIN SIZE CLASSIFICATION Grain Type Standard Sieve Size Grain Size in Millimeters Boulders Above 12 inches Above 305 Cobbles 12 to 13 inches 305 to 76.2 Gravel 3 inches to No. 4 76.2 to 4.76 Coarse -grained 3 to'% inches 76.2 to 19.1 Fine-grained 3/ inches to No_ 4 19.1 to 4.76 Sand No. 4 to No. 200 4.76 to 0.074 Coarse -grained No. 4 to No. 10 4.76 to 2.00 Medium -grained No. 10 to No. 40 2.00 to 0.042 Fine-grained No. 40 to No. 200 0.042 to 0.074 Silt and Clay Below No. 200 Below 0.074 PLASTICITY CHART NEEMONMEENEENNERM z IL NEENNEEMEN IL -0 t0 20 30 40 50 50 76 60 g0 10D LIQUID LIMIT (LL) 1%) Log of Drill Hale B-1 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-1 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Watery Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Water Content Description L, a o r- CD m y Z ° a n 10 20 30 40 Ground Surface SILTY SAND/SAND (SAMSP), fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 2 medium dense M 104.3 2.2 17 4 6 a 105.5 3.0 18 8 10 Same as above, loose to medium dense 3,3 11 12 14 Same as above, medium dense 2.6 14 10 18 20 e 4.1 16 22 E { 24 26 a 3.9 16 28 30 4-7 Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Drill Date: 5114107 Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet- 1 of 2 Log of Drill Hole B-1 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-1 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Watery Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Water Content t°�} v Description w y ii E °' n n �' C1 VJ 3 n m a 10 20 30 40 SILTY SANDISAND (SWSP), 2.7 17 fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 32 medium dense 34 SILTY SAND (SM), fine grained, light brown, moist, medium dense 5 8 15 36 313 SANDY SILT W/CLAY (ML), 40 fine grained, brown, very moist, very stiff 31.4 22 42 SILTY SAND (SM), fine grained, light brown, slightly moist, medium 44 dense 46 4.9 22 48 CLAYEY SIL T (ML), fine grained, brown, very moist, stiff 50 _ 31.9 16 End of Borehole 52 Total Depth = 51' 54 No groundwater was encountered during drilling Mole backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped 5114107 56 58 60 Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Drill Date: 5114107 Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 2 of 2 Log of Drill Hole B-2 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-2 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Watery Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE g e Water Content v Description w y a 1 °T a 10 20 30 40 , , Ground Surface SILTY SAME/SAND (SWSPj, line to medium grained, light brown, damp, medium 2 dense 94.7 1.6 17 4 Same as above, loose to medium dense 101.3 1.2 10 6- S 10 z. .. 2.7 ! 0 12 14 Same as above, medium dense 3.3 15 16 1a 20 Same as above, slightly moist •. 3.7 20 End of Borehole 22 Total Depth = 21` 24 No groundwater was encountered during drilling Hole backflled with soil cuttings and tamped 5114107 26 28 3D I Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Drill Date: 5114/07 Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Log of Drill Hole B-3 Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-3 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Water> Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Cl Q Water Content (%) Description 0. 3 © 5 Q in3 �O 10 20 30 40 co m Ground Surface SILTY SAND/SAND (SM/SP), fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 2 dense 107.1 2.0 35 4- Same as above, dense 106.0 2.2 18 B 8 10 Same as above, loose 2.0 8 12 14 Same as above, loose to medium dense 20 11 16 18 2a End of Borehole 22 Total Depth = 20' No groundwater was encountered during drilling 24 Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped 5114107 26 28 30 Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Date: 5114I07 Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazai'1 and Associates Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Log of Dail Hole B4 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A4 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Water> Initial: At Comptetion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE U 0 Water Content (%) Description c o 10 20 30 40 Ground Surface SILTY SAND/SAND (SWSP), Fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 2 dense a 108.2 1.9 40 4 6 111.2 3.0 31 g 10 Same as above, loose to medium dense _ 21 12 12 14 16 2.6 11 1$ . 20 Same as above, medium dense 21 15 End of Borehole 22 Total Depth = 21' 24 No groundwater was encountered during drilling Hole backfilled with sail cuttings and tamped 5/14107 26 2$ 30 Drill Method: Follow Stem Auger Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Drill Date: 5114107 Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Log of Drill Hole B-S Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Project No. 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-5 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK. Depth to Waterer Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE w v Water Content � Description A ❑ N p Cx 0 co 10 20 30 40 I I ! ! Ground Surface SILTY SAND (SM), fine grained, light brown, damp 2 SILTY 5ANDfSAND (SMISP), 111.5 2.$ 45 fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist. q dense 6 108.0 2.1 34 a 10 Same as above, loose 2.7 $ End of Borehole 12 Total Depth = 11 ` 14 No groundwater was encountered during drilling Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped 5/14/07 16 18 20 22 24 2$ 28 3ia Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Driller: Williams Drilling Krazan and Associates Drill Date: 5/14107 Hale Size: 8" Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Log of Drill Hole B-6 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Project No: 112-07036 Client: {regency Centers Figure No.: A-6 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Watery Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE U Water Content (0/6) � Description 4 Q U) 2 —�° 110 20 30 40 Ground Surface SILTY SAND (SM), .line grained, light brawn, damp 2 31L7YSAND/SANl3 (SM/Sp), 111.1 1.6 54 fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 4 very dense Same as above, medium dense 110.5 2.2 26 6 8 10 1.3 15 12 14 Same as above, 2- 16 18A. 20 End of Borehole 22 Total Depth 20' No groundwater was encountered during drilling 24 Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped 5114107 26 28 30 Drill Method: Hollow Stern Auger Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Drill Date: 5/14107 Hole Size: 13" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Log of Drill Hole B-7 Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-7 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Waterer Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE U Q Water Content (%) Description y o t m v ❑ T to 2 ❑ ° a F- CD 10 20 30 40 Ground Surface SILTY SAND (SM), fine grained, light brown, damp 2 SILTY SAND/SAND (SWSP), 106.7 1.8 33 fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 4 dense SILTY SAND (SM), 104•0 2.5 11 fi fine grained, light brown, slightly moist, loose to medium dense 8 SILTY SAND/SAND (SWSP), fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, medium dense 10 2.2 15 End of Borehole 12 Total Depth = 11' 14 No groundwater was encountered during drilling Hole backiilled with soil cuttings and tamped 5114107 1fi 18 20 22 24 2fi 28 30 Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Date: 5t14107 Drill Rig: Simco 2BOO Krazan and Associates Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Log of Drill Hole B-S Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-8 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Watery Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE U g .. Water Content N e Description i ocEn' .0 m W m 10 20 30 40 i'-a Ground Surface SILTY SAND (SM), Fine grained, light brown, slightly moist, medium 2 dense 102.2 2.4 X 17 4-- 11 96.8 2.6 6- SILTY SANDISAND (SMISP), 8 fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, loose to medium dense 10 10 End of Borehole 12 Total Depth =1 V 1 q No groundwater was encountered during drilling Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped 5114107 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Date: 5114/07 Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Log of Drill Hole B-9 Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-9 Location: La Quints, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Watery Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Water Content {%} DescriptionCL o m 10 20 30 40 n cn g° H Ground Surface SfLTY SANDISAND (SM1SP), f ne to medium grained, tight brown, damp 2 S&TY SAND (SM), 105,6 1.3 24 fine to medium grained, light brown, damp, medium dense 97.3 3.0 17 6 $ SILTY SANDISAND (SMISP), fine to medium grained, light brown, damp, loose to 10 medium dense 1.7 11 w 12 14 Same as above, medium dense 2.2 17 16 18 20 End of Borehole 22 Total Depth = 20' No groundwater was encountered during drilling Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped 24 5115107 26 _. . 28 30 Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Date: 5115107 Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation:: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Log of Brill Hole B-1O Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No., A-10 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Watery Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE ° o Water Content (%) Description �, y d' In Q rn II m 10 20 30 40 Ground Surface SILTY SAND/SAND (SMISP), fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 2 medium dense a 107.7 4.8 20 4 6 105.4 2.0 15 8 10 Same as above, loose 2.4 3 12 14 Same as above, medium dense 2.9 16 18 20 End of Borehole 22 Total Depth = 20` No groundwater was encountered during drilling 24 Male backflled with soil cuttings and tamped 5115107 26 II 1 28 30 Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Drill Date: 5115/07 Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Log of Drill Hole B-11 Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A 11 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Watery Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Water Content (%) 9 0 Description CU In o 10 20 30 40 Ground Surface SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 2 medium dense - 105.7 3.5 24 4 SILTY SAND/SAND (SMfSP), _ fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 106.71 2.7 18 J. 8 medium dense 8 10 1.9 15 End of Borehole 12 Total Depth = 11' 14 No groundwater was encountered during drilling Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped 5115107 18 18 2a 2z 24 26 28 30 Drill Method: Hollow Stern Auger Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Drill Date: 5115107 Hole size: 8° Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Log of Drill Hole B-12 Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-12 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Water> initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE 19 Water Content (%) .T. n Description m v N 6i 10 20 30 40 ❑ (n ❑ m Ground Surface SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 2 dense 2.4 44 112.6 4 Same as above, medium dense 2.9 22 6 109.8 SILTY SAND/SAND (SMISP), fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 8 medium dense SILTY SAND (SM), 10 fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 5 4 7 loose 12 End of Borehole Total Depth = 11' 14 No groundwater was encountered during drilling Hole backliilled with soll cuttings and tamped 5115107 16 -- ... 18 20 22 24 2fi 28 34 Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Bate: 511 %7 Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Log of Drill Hole B-13 Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A 13 Location: La Quint@, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Watery Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE a Water Content (%) Description e iv � D Q N 7� o C 10 20 30 40 Ground Surface SILTY SAND fSM), fine grained, light brown, damp 2 21 � SILTY SA ND/SAND (5M/SP), 107,71 2,7 fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 4 medium dense 6 17 107.0 2.0 8 10 Same as above, loose to medium dense - 4.1 12 End of Borehole 12 Total Depth - 11' 14 No groundwater was encountered during drilling Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped 5I15107 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 Drill Method: Hallow Stern Auger Drill Date: 5115/07 Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Log of Drill Hole 8-14 Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-14 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Watery Initial: At Completion. SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE chi L Water Content (°�) Description w o ❑ T to Z ❑ m 10 20 30 40 Ground Surface SILTY SANDISAND (SM/SP), fine to medium grained, light brown, damp 2 SILTYSAND (SM), 102.6 1.9 16 fine grained, light brown, slightly moist, medium 4 dense SILTYSAND/SAND (SM/SP), 105.9 2.5 17 fine to medium grained, light grown, slightly moist, 6 medium dense B SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium grained, fight brown, slightly moist, 10 loose 3.e 9 121. SILTY SAND/SAND (SM/SP), fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, 14 medium dense 16 e 3.3 19 18 - 20 End of Borehole 22 Total Depth = 20' No groundwaterwas encountered during drilling 24 Hole back -filled with soil cuttings and tamped 5/15107 26 j28 30 Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Date: 5115/07 Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Hoie Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Log of Drill Hole B-15 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-15 Location: La Ouinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Water> Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE a o Water Content (96} _ Description ?, .0 0 •p � 7 N W N 2 iT m 10 20 30 40 Ground Surface SILTY SAND (SM), fine grained, light brown, slightly moist, loose to 2 medium dense — 95.6 2.5^ 13 4 6 C 90.8 3.5 10 8 SI,LrYSAND/SAND(SM/SP), fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, loose to medium dense 10 C. 4.9 11 12 14 Same as above, medium dense - 3.7 19 16 18 20 End of Borehole 22 Total Depth = 2V No groundwater was encountered during drilling 24 Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped 5/15/07 26 28 30 Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Driller: Williams frilling Krazan and Associates Drill Date: 5115/07 Hole Size: 8" Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of i Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Log of Drill Hale B-'I fi Project No: 112-07036 Client: Regency Centers Figure No.: A-16 Location: La Quinta, CA Logged By: SK Depth to Watery Initial: At Completion: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE ° Water Content N Description L p 0 Vi H O u> © F m 10 20 30 40 Ground Surface SfL7Y SAND (SMj, fine grained, light brawn, slightly moist, loose to 2 medium dense 94.6 4.1 11 4 6 I 98.2 4.2 13 SlLTY SAND/SAND {SM/SPj, 8 fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist, dense 10 � 3.1 21 12 14 Same as above, damp 1.2 23 16 18 J. 20 End of Borehole 22 - Total Depth = 20' No groundwater was encountered during drilling Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped 24 5115107 26 2t3 30 Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drill Date: 5/15/07 Drill Rig: Simco 2800 Krazan and Associates Hole Size: 8" Driller: Williams Drilling Elevation: See Site Plan Sheet: 1 of 1 Shear Strength Dia-gram (Direct Shear) ASTM D - 30801 AASHTO T - 236 Project Number Burin No. & Depth SoilEe Date 112-07036 B-1 51 (SM-SP), Silty Sand -Sand 51181071 Cohesion: 0.0 Ksf Angle of Internal Friction: 37 E M MrA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Krazan Testing Laboratory Shear Strength Dia ram Direct Shear ASTM D - 3080 ! AASHTO T - 236 Project Number Badng No. & Depth Soil im I Date 112-07036 B-2 @ 2' 1 (SM-SP), Silty Sand - Sand 1 5118107 Krazan Testing Laboratory Shear Strength Diagram (Direct Shear) ASTM D - 30801 AASHTO T - 236 Project Number IBorin(J'No. . Depth Soil Type Date 112-07036 1 E3-9 @ I (SM), Silty Sand 5/18/07 Cohesion: 0.0 Ksf Angle of Internal Friction: 32 ���� ems® �=� ��A� c-� Krazan Testing Laboratory Shear Strength Diagram Direct Shear) ASTM D - 3080 I AASHTO T - 236 Project Number Boring No. & Qe th SoilType pe Date 112-07036 &15 2' (SM), Silty Sand 5118107 3.00 w 2.0D rn e 1.00 0.00 G.v 1.0 2.0 3.0 Normal Load, Ksf Krazan Testing Laboratory Consolidation Test Project No Boring No. & Depth Date I Soil Classification 112-0 B-1 2' 5118107 1 (SM-SP), Silty Sand - Sand Load in Kips per Square Foot 0.1 1 10 100 0.00 i % Consolidation 2Ksf: 0.9 % � .00 2.00 f f M M A f ��f• INN 3.00 4.00 a 4 w+ •O C N d a 8.00 —._____ _ _. _ - 7.00 10.00 Krazan Testing Laboratory Consolidation Test Project No Boring No. & Depth Date Soil Classification 112-07036 B-31 (SM-SP), Silty Sand - Sand Load in Kips per Square Foot 0.1 1 IQ 100 0.00 % Consolidation @ 2KsF- 0.7% 2.00 3.00 4.00 5,00 c. 6.00 7.00 8.00 9-01) I 0.00 Krazan Testing Laboratory Consolidation Test -I- roject No Boring No. & Depth Date =Soil Classification 112-07-0-3-6 B-15 -1 - (SM)l Silty Sand Load in Kips per Square Foot 0.1 1 10 100 0.00 % Consolidation @ 21(sf. 1.7% 1.00 2.00-- 3.00 4M .2 O 0 -00 0. 6.00 TGO 9-00 10.00 Krazan Testing Laboratory Consolidation Test -project No I Baring No. & Depth Date F— Soil Classification 112-07036 1 B-16 @ 2' 5118/07 tSM), Silty Sand Load in Kips per Square Foot 0.1 1 iU 100 0.00 % Consolidation @ 2Ksf- 1.5% 2.00 4.00 O 5.0o 6,00 7.00 8.00 10.00 Krazan Testing Laboratory ONISSW INSOMRd ci 0) c; CO c; F- 6 w ci W) 6 ftr ci Lh cs ci N C3 C3 O Ci LL in T9 fl) Cl LL CTI CA cil c aR CL O LL -74 0 0 CD N (D 0.0 E E E z z m Z t Z woo CL E ra CL IL M U) ONISSVd IN33H3d C3 n ci cs CD Ln C3 cli m O CD Cj 0 V m t;r C co m C 0 Cf) in CD Q CL I,- 2 a. 0 C to U) ONISSVd IN30113el 0 v R C� C%r c; 0 O 0 CD C.) ca CD .0 E m Z m r w C, LL CD C.) tD tD CL L o O (D E E E m :3 = z z z CD (D U a E 0 m rL CL to (4 E)NISSVd INHOH3d m co C! CD to 0 C3 C3 C3, tv a 0 ci a, C) O 10-000 im di to z U) q aj 72 co LL M, C9 Co r E! 0 GI al > Ca C: m U) cr C co coto ED co LO -.� _j CL9 2 CL t;; 0 m c Q ONISSW IN33HBld 0 0 0 0 0 o Q 0 m co f - to ci Ln ci 0— C) C3 4D 4D C C3 CD P I(s rA LO IL IIM- ul Im 'E lu i L Co R9 DNISSVd IN33M3d C 0 0 co CD C3 0 0 a 0) 0 C5 co Fl- 6 ci to cs LO ci m 6 6 6 C� E o 4=1 U) CD -0 E m z cv uj ra Cl) cl) > 'E o a g (D ro�I E E E zz wz L) CL E a- a- -4 ONISSVd INBOU3d O 0 In 10 0 0 0 m ci co c; r, rzi to 6 Ln ci ci C> Ci O ci ED rz U. to 0 -0 r= zi z to Ln B - ------ Ll CD Q- ci co C,O r_ 0 05 CO C) C5 to Cl M C tun E E 0 E zz Z to C.) CL 2 Q. CL V) ul 0 0 M C C EQ R w VALUE TEST ASTM D - 28441 CAL 301 Project Number 112-07036 Project Name Prop. Jefferson Square Date 5118107 Sample Location/Curve Number RV# 1 (8-1 @ 0-2-) Soil Classification (SM-SP), Silty Sand -Sand TEST A 8 C Percent Moisture fl Compaction, % 12.6 13.5 14.4 Dry Density, Ibmfcu.ft. 107.8 108.1 109.0 Exudation Pressure psi 740 330 160 Ex anslon Pressure, Dial Reading) 0 0 0 Expansion Pressure, psf 0 0 0 Resistance Value R 1 63 59 53 iiiiim�n INO11i1n111�C���MUREIIIIIIII . �iiii� :. iiIniii i�11 nun na�i'���'�iii���i . ., 5111,11UR v �u�� � i In 0 ��n ��nnn��uonau . I , , uenuanoi�n�� nn��nun��u�in ii1i�0i1iii0 anu°nuiiri�un iHIM INN 1imii5111i�a n uanunn��nnu n IMunuu I Iu nuMnINnnnnu au Ron nnn MINEi rinnn°iiiniian I0A����� unnnu��n��un I nii11n°nna°un I Pi0i iiii Krazan Testing Laboratory R - VALUE TEST ASTWI D - 28441 CAL 301 Project Number Project Dame Date Sample Location/Curve Number Soil Classification 112-07036 Prop. Jefferson Square 5118107 RV# 2 (B-12 @ 0-2-) (SM), Silty Sand TESL' A B C Percent Moisture @ Compaction, °% 11.3 12.2 10.3 Q Densi , Ibmlcu.ft. 116.3 115.9 115.7 Exudation Pressure psi 350 140 700 Expansion Pressure, Dial Reading) 0 0 0 Expansion Pressure, psf 0 0 0 Resistance Value R 54 1 43 59 i�II�iiiui��B�iU . 111111111111110111 . . CiIIai��' I � �iii I u��uunn��nu�� unNIennn i'n'u°nniiiinuu 11nnINnuMnMn IIIIIIannIInuII , .. , , � HIM nV��aiINiiiii�i uunneiiiinun nuniiiPUiiriu IN141"FAIIIIIIII IIIII UNINUU111119UN unnnNIuenuII iifl nNnnuNIn11011UP nu�� MENNINUOUNE A Mil nnIIIInnu InN RA�ii���iii�iiii� annniiun°nea Krazan Testing Laboratory Project Number Project Name Date Sample location Sample/Curve Number Soil Classification Test Method Laboratory Compaction Cure ASTM - D15579 D698 : 112-07035 : Prop. Jefferson Square 05/18107 B-1 @ 0-2' :1 (SM-SP), Silty Sand _ Sand 1557 A i 2 3 4 Weight of Moist Specimen & Mold, gm 3854.9 3881.2 3884.5 3797.7 Weight of Compaction Mold, gm 1988.8 1988.8 1988.8 1988.8 Weight of Moist Specimen, m 1866.1 1892.4 1895.7 1808.9 Volume of mold, cu. ft. 0.0332 0.0332 0.0332 0.0332 Wet Density, IbslcuA 123.9 125.7 125.9 120.1 Weight of Wet Moisture Sample, gm 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 Weight of R Moisture Sam le, gm 178.5 175.7 172.9 181.6 Moisture Content, % 12.0% 13.8% 15.7% 10.1 % Dry Density, Ibsfcu.ft. 110.6 110.4 108.8 10g.1 al�l�sr1&= ! Dry Density- 111.0 lbsicu.ft =Mfi Optimum Moisture Content: 13.0% KIM ME ONCE ME ME 'RUM �>•��Il�1�#At Krazan Testing Laboratory Project Number Project Name Date Sample location SamplelCurve Number Soil Classification Test Method Laboratoly Compaction Curve ASTM - D1557, D698 112-07036 Prop. Jefferson Square 05/18107 B-12 @ 0-2' ;2 (SM), Silty Sand 1557 A 1 2 3 4 Weight of Moist Specimen & Mold, gm 3942.8 3954.3 3911.1 3842.1 Weight of Compaction Mold, gm 1988.8 1988.8 1988.8 1988.8 Weight of Moist S ecimen, gm 1954.0 1965.5 1922.3 1853.3 Volume of mold, cu. ft. 0.0332 0.0332 6.0332 0.0332- Wet Density, lbs/cu.ft. 129.8 130.5 127.6 123.1 Weight of Wet Moisture Sam le, gm 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 Weight of Dry Moisture} Sample, gm 182.4 179.4 185.7 188.9 Moisture Content, % 9.6% 11.5% 7.7% 5.9% ,Dry Density, Ibslcu.ft. 118.3 117.1 118.5 116.2 Krazan Testing Laboratory Expansion Index Teat ASTM D - 48291 UBC Std. 18-2 Project Number Project Name Date Sample location/ Depth Sample Number Soil Classification : 112-07036 : Prop. Jefferson Square : 5/18/07 : B-1 @ 0-2' :1 : (SM-SP), Silty Sand - Sand Trial # 1 2 3 Wei ht of Soil & Mold, gms 560.3 Weight of Mold, gms 170.7 Weight of Soil, gms 389.6 Wet Density, Lbslcu.ft. 117,E Weight of Moisture Sample (Wet), gms 300.0 Weight of Moisture Sample D , gms 270.1 Moisture. Content, % 11.1 D Densi , Lbs/cu.ft. 105.8 Specific Gravity of Soil 2.7 Degree of Saturation, % 50.4 Time Inital 30 min 1 hr 6hrs 12 hrs 24 hrs Dial Reading _ -- I -- I -_ I -- 1 0 Expansion Index measured Expansion Index 50 Expansion Index = 0 -- 0.0 Expansion Potential Table Exp. Index Potential Exp, 0 - 20 Very Low 21 - 50 Low 51 - 90 Medium 91 -130 High >130 Very High Krazan Testing Laboratory Expansion index Test ASTM D - 48291 UBC Std.18-2 Project Number Project Name Date Sample location/ Depth Sample Number Soil Classification 112-07036 Prop. Jefferson Square 5118/07 B-12 @ 0-2' :2 (SM), Silty Sand Trial # 1 2 3 Weight of Soil & Mold, gms 592.3 Weight of Mold, gms 185.0 Weight of Soil, gms 407.3 Wet Density, Lbslcu.ft. 122.8 'Weight of Moisture Sam le et gms 300.0 eight of Moisture Sample D ,. ms 275.6 Moisture Content, °Ia rDr 8.9 Density,Lbslcu.ft. 112-$ S ecific Gravity of Soil 2.7 Degree of Saturation, % 48.5 Time Inital I 30min 1 hr 6hrs 1 12 hrs 24 hrs Dial Reading 0 Expansion Index measured Expansion Index 50 Expansion Index = — 0 0.0 0 Expansion Potential Table Exp. Index Potential Exp. 0 - 20 Very Low 21 - 50 Low 51 - 90 Medium 91 -130 High >130 1 Very High Klrazan Testing Laboratory NRY-21-2007 10:12 ENVIRD-C"34, INC 9095905925 P.02iO3 Enviro - Chem, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 91766 Tel (909) 590-5905 Fax (09) 590-5907 LABORATORY REPORT CUSTOMER; Zrammit & Associates, Inc. 4221 Erickell St. Ontario, CA 91761 Tol(909)974-4400 Fax(909)974-4022 PROJECT. La Quinta MATRIX:SOIL DATE RECEIVED:05/18I07 SAMPLIIJG DADATE:05/14107 DATE ANALYZED:05118-19/0.7 REPORT TO:MR. CLARMCE gIANG DATE REPORTED;05/21107 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SAMPLE I.D.: 112-0703618-IGO-2' LAB I.D.: 070518-62 PARAM T35R SAMPLE RESULT UNIT PQL DF UNMOD RESISTIVITY 1 25d0 OIINIs-crt 100000* CALTPJI7S FA E NI) MC KG 10 5^ IEFA 9038 CHLORME 23 . el _w/XG 10 1 EPA 9253 pii _ . - 9 - D2 pii/Unit EPA 9045C COMETS DF = DILUTION FACTOR PQL = PRACTICAL QUANTITATION LIMIT ACTUAL DETECTION LIMIT = DF X PQL = ACTUAL. DETECTION LIMIT RAISED DUE TO MATRIX INTERFERENCE MG/RG = MILLIGRAM PER KILOGRAM = PPM OHMS -CM = OHMS -CENTIMETER RESISTIVITY = 1/CONDUCTIVITY W = HIGH LIMIT DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: CAL-DHS ELAP CERTIFICATE No.: 1555 APPENDIX B GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL Appendix B Page B. 1 When the text of the report conflicts with the general specifications in this appendix, the recommendations in the report have precedence. SCOPE OF WORK: These specifications and applicable plans pertain to and include all earthwork associated with the site rough grading, including, but not limited to, the furnishing of all labor, tools and equipment necessary for site clearing and grubbing, stripping, preparation of foundation materials for receiving f ill, a xcavation, p rocessing, p lacernent a nd c ompaction o f f ill a nd b ackfill m aterials t o t he lines and gradesshown on the project grading plans and disposal of excess materials. PERFORMANCE: The Contractor shall be responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthworks in accordance with the project plans and specifications. This work shall be inspected and tested by a representative of Krazan and Associates, Incorporated, hereinafter referred to as the Soils Engineer and/or Testing Agency. Attainment of design grades, when achieved shall be certified by the project Civil Engineer. Both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer are the Owner's representatives. If the Contractor should fail to meet the technical or design requirements embodied in this document and on the applicable plans, he shall make the necessary adjustments until all work is deemed satisfactory as determined by both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer. No deviation from these specifications shall be made except upon written approval of the Soils Engineer, Civil Engineer, or project Architect. No earthwork shall be performed without the physical presence or approval of the Soils Engineer. The Contractor shall notify the Soils Engineer at least 2 working days prior to the commencement of any aspect of the site earthwork. The Contractor agrees that he shall assume sole and complete responsibility for job site conditions during the course of construction of this project, including safety of all persons and property; that this requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours; and that the Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the Owner and the Engineers harmless from any and all liability, real or alleged, in connection with the performance of work on this project, except for liability arising from the sole negligence of the Owner or the Engineers. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: All compacted materials shall be densified to no less that 95 percent of relative compaction based on ASTM D1557-00 Test Method, UBC or CAL-216, as specified in the technical portion of the Soil Engineer's report. The location and frequency of field density tests shall be as determined b y t he S oils E ngineer. T he r esults o f t hese t ests a nd c ompliance w ith t hese specifications shall be the basis upon which satisfactory completion of work will be judged by the Soils Engineer. SOILS AND FOUNDATION CONDITIONS: The Contractor is presumed to have visited the site and to have familiarized himself with existing site conditions and the contents of the data presented in the Geotechnical Engineering Report. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 11207036.doe Appendix B Page B. 2 The Contractor shall make his own interpretation of the data contained in the Geotechnical Engineering Report and the Contractor shall not be relieved of liability under the Contractor for any loss sustained as a result of any variance between conditions indicated by or deduced from said report and the actual conditions encountered during the progress of the work. DUST CONTROL: The work includes dust control as required for the alleviation or prevention of any dust nuisance on or about the site or the borrow area, or off -site if caused by the Contractor's operation either during the performance of the earthwork or resulting from the conditions in which the Contractor leaves the site. The Contractor shall assume all liability, including court costs of codefendants, for all claims related to dust or wind-blown materials attributable to his work. SITE PREPARATION Site preparation shall consist of site clearing and grubbing and preparation of foundation materials for receiving fill. CLEARING AND GRUBBING: The Contractor shall accept the site in this present condition and shall demolish and/or remove from the area of designated project earthwork all structures, both surface and subsurface, trees, brush, roots, debris, organic matter and all other matter determined by the Soils Engineer to be deleterious. Such materials shall become the property of the Contractor and shall be removed from the site. Tree root systems in proposed building areas should be removed to a minimum depth of 3 feet and to such an extent, which would permit removal of all roots greater than 1 inch in diameter. Tree roots removed in parking areas may be limited to the upper 11/2 feet of the ground surface. Backf ll or tree root excavation should not be permitted until all exposed surfaces have been inspected and the Soils Engineer is present for the proper control of backfill placement and compaction. Burning in areas, which are to receive fill materials, shall not be permitted. SUBGRADE PREPARATION: Surfaces to receive Engineered Fill, shall be prepared as outlined above, excavated/scarified to a minimum depth of 8 inches, moisture -conditioned as necessary, and recompaeted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Loose soil areas and/or areas of disturbed soil shall be moisture -conditioned as necessary and recompacted to 95 percent relative compaction. All ruts, hummocks, or other uneven surface features shall be removed by surface grading prior to placement of any fill materials. All areas, which are to receive fill materials, shall be approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of any of the fill material. EXCAVATION: All excavation shall be accomplished to the tolerance normally defined by the Civil Engineer as shown on the project grading plans. All over -excavation below the grades specified shall be backfilled at the Contractor's expense and shall be compacted in accordance with the applicable technical requirements. FILL AND BACKFILL MATERIAL: No material shall be moved or compacted without the presence of the Soils Engineer. Material from the required site excavation may be utilized for construction site fills, provided prior approval is given by the Soils Engineer. All materials utilized for constructing site fills shall be free from vegetation or other deleterious matter as determined by the Soils Engineer. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 11207036.doe Appendix B Page B. 3 PLACEMENT, SPREADING AND COMPACTION: The placement and spreading of approved fill materials and the processing and compaction of approved fill and native materials shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. However, compaction of fill materials by flooding, ponding, or jetting shall not be permitted unless specifically approved by local code, as well as the Soils Engineer. Both cut and fill shall be surface -compacted to the satisfaction of the Soils Engineer prior to Final acceptance. SEASONAL LIMITS: No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled while it is frozen or thawing, or during unfavorable wet weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by heavy rains, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Soils Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of previously placed fill is as specified. Krazan & Associates, Inc. offIres Serving The Western United States 1 1zo7a36.doe Appendix C Page C. 1 APPENDIX C GENERAL PAVEMENT SPECIFICATIONS 1. DEFINITIONS - The term "pavement" shall include asphalt concrete surfacing, untreated aggregate base, and aggregate subbase. The term "subgrade" is that portion of the area on Which surfacing, base, or subbase is to be placed. The term."Standard Specifications": hereinafter referred to is the January 1999 Standard Specifications of the State of California, Department of Transportation, and the "Materials Manual" is the Materials Manual of Testing and Control Procedures, State of California, Department of Public Works, Division of Highways. The term "relative compaction" refers to the field density expressed as a percentage of the maximum laboratory density as defined in the ASTM D1557-00. 2. SCOPE OF WORK - This portion of the work shall include all labor, materials, tools, and equipment necessary for, and reasonably incidental to the completion of the pavement shown on the plans and as herein specified, except work specifically notes as "Work Not Included." 3. PREPARATION OF THE SUBGRADE - The Contractor shall prepare the surface of the various subgrades receiving subsequent pavement courses to the lines, grades, and dimensions given an the plans. The upper 12 inches of the soil subgrade beneath the pavement section shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent. The finished subgrades shall be tested and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to the placement of additional pavement courses. 4. UNTREATED AGGREGATE BASE - The aggregate base material shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The aggregate base material shall conform to the requirements of Section 26 of the Standard Specifications for Class 2 material, 3/a-inches maximum size. The aggregate base material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent. The aggregate base material shall be spread and compacted in accordance with Section 26 of the Standard Specifications. The aggregate base material shall be spread in layers not exceeding 6 inches and each layer of aggregate material course shall be tested and approved by the Geoteelmical Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers. 5. AGGREGATE SUBBASE - The aggregate subbase shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The aggregate subbase material s hail c onform t o the r equirements o f S ection 2 5 o f the S tandard Specifications for Class U material. The aggregate subbase material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent, and it shall be spread and c ompacted i n accordance w ith Section 2 5 o f the S tandard Specifications. Each layer of aggregate subbase shall be tested and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers. Krazaa & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 1I207036-doc Appendix C Page C. 2 t concrete surfacing shall consist of a mixture Of b. ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACING�xed a#la central mixing plant and spread and compacted aggregate and paving grade asphalt, an a prepared base in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown an the plans. The viscosity grade of the asphalt shall be AR-8000. The mineral aggregate shall be Type B, %2-inch or'/a- the cements set forth and 3 inch rnaximum ding for the base course, and shall conform to theSection 9 of the Standard medium Specifications. inch maximum, medium grading, forec (cations. q The drying, proportioning, and mixing of the materials shall conform to Section 39. The prime coat, spreading and compacting equipment, and spreading and compacting the mixture shall l be conform to the applicable chapters otSection is below 54 degreesxF ption Tlie siurfacitig shall be rolledat no surface course hwlth a placed when the atmospheric temperau combination steel -wheel and pneumatic rollers, as described in Section 39-6. The surface course shall be placed with an approved self-propelled mechanical spreading and finishing machine. 7. FOG SEAL COAT - The fog seal (mixing type asphalt emulsion) shall conform to and be applied in accordance with the requirements of Section 37. Krazan & Associates, Inc. offices Serving The westem united States 11207036.doc I S.A. KrmaZan & A S S 0 C I A T E S, I N C. t: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ■ ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING a INSPECTION July 8, 2008 r. Thoma.9 Middleton Regency Centers Inc. 36 Executive Park, Saito IN Irvine, CA 92614 RE: Percolation state Study Proposed Shopping Center Je.Ffersan Street and Fred Waring Drive La Quinta, California Dear Mr, Middleton, I{A Projecl No. 112-07036 In accordance with your request, we have performed percolation testing at the subject site. This report documents the services and provides the results of our field and laboratory study, PURPOSE AJgD SCOPE This study was conducted to measure the approximate percolation hates within the gear -surface strata of the site. It is otir understanding that the data will be used by the project design team in their development of tht on site storm water disposal system. The pemolation luting conducted at the subject site was perfbrmed in general a=ordauce with the City of La QLnta, Public Works Department, Engineering BulIethi #06-16, I•Iydroiogy and Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems, USBR Percolation Tesl Standard. Our scope of services was outlined in our change order dated June 11, 2008 ( A Project No- 112-07036) and included the fallowing: Conducting three (3) percolation tests within the area of the proposed detention basins at the subject site. Two of the percolatimi tests were performed at depths of approximately 10 to 13 feet below existing grade. The percolation lest for the underground basin was performed at a depth of approximately 20 to 23 feet Below the existing grade. A Iota] of thrce exploratory borings were performed adjacent to the percolation tests. These exploratory borings were extended to a depth ofat least 15 feet below the bottom ofeach test. 6 Preparation of this report summarizing the results of our invest igativ3l_ 'Dffiees Serviag The Western United States 4221 Brickctl Scree, Draario, California 9I761 ■ (909) 974-4400 ■ Fax; (909) 97-941022 CAA No. 112-07036 Page 2 of 4 �5 SITE, LOCATION AND SITE DESCRII'T ON Tile proposed site is looted at the intersection of Jeffersull Street and Fred Waring Drive iz La Quinta Calfforrua. The site is roughly rectarngular ill sbape and rougliiy sloping to the north and east. At the time of our field investigatioiQ and Iesting program, tine site was undeveloped and covered with sparse bushes and exposed soil. SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSPACE CONDITIONS The subsurface profile generally consisted of loose to dense foe sand and fine silty ids extending to tho maximum depth explored. During the excavation of the borings, continuous visual and physical examination. was conducted on the soil cut-tuigs. Signifieaut silt or clay layers/lenses were not identified as being encountered in any of the borings at the site. Corrosion tests were performed to evaluate the soil colrosivity to the buried structures. The results of the tests are included as follows: Parameter Results Test Method Resistivity 2,460 ohms-cin Galirans Sulfate 268 mglkg EPA 9038 Chloride 117 rngft EPA 9253 pH 7,52 EPA 9045C Excessive sulfate or chloride in either the soil or native water may result in an adverse reaction between the cement in concrete and the soil. California Building Code has developed criteria for en+aIuation of sulfate and chloride levels and low they reiate to cement reactivity with soil andlor water. The soil samples from the siibiect site were tested to have a IOW sulfate and chloride concentrations. Tlie7eforg, no special design requirements are necessary to coEnpcnsate for sulfate or chloride reaetivity with the cement. Electrical resistivity testing of the soil indicates that the oasite soils may have a mild potential for metal loss from elemtrochemieaI corrosion process. PEI1COLATION TESTING Two methods for percolation testing are giveo in the City of La Quinta, Public Works Deparinien4 Engineering Bulletin #06-16, Hydrology and Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems, USBR Percolation Test Standard. Jointer ASTM bauble Ring Infiltrometer Tcst or U.S. Bureau ofReclar=ion Test were recommended by Ibe City of La Quinta as approved test rnediods. The U_5, Bureau of Reclaunation method was determined to be the most prudent for the subjecl site_ The test locations are prescoted on file attaciied site pIM Figure 1. Detail results of the percolation tests are attached. The data is preseiiW in tabular format. The soil percolation rates arc based on tests conducted with clean water, The infil[ration rates may vary with time as a result of soil clogging from water impurities. A factor of saky should be i icorparated into the design of the basins to compensate OM Serving The Western United States 4221 Mae] I Stmel, Onluriu, Ca I ifornin 9176 J ■ (90R) 974-4400 a Fax., (909) 974-4022 J 2-070U La QuWa Ferc K K.A No. 1 I2-07036 Page 3 of 4 z S for these factors. In addition$ petiadic maintenance consisting of clearing the bottom of the basins siianld be expected_ The highest percolation rate ranges from 4.25 inches to 6.5 incises per haw. A minimum factor ofsa#'ety of 2.0 sha4ld be assigried to this value. The recommended design percolation rate should be a maximum of 2.0 inches per hour. L TATIONS Q*(,ccimical Engineering is one of the newest divisions of Civil Engineering_ This branch of Civil. Engineering is constantly improving as rxew technologies and ur*rstamduig off' earth sciences advance_ Although our services were conducted in accordance with current cri&cering ptMctice, uodoubtedly there will be substantial future improvements an this branch of engineering. In addition to advancements in the field of Soils Engineering, physical changes in the site, either dtie to excavation or fill placement, new agency regulations, or passible changes xa the proposed structure after the soils report is completed may require the soils report to be professionally reviewed. tn light of this, the Owner should be aware that there is a practical limit to the usefulness of this report withcut critical review. Although the time limit for this review is strictly arbitrary, it is suggested that I year be considered a reasanabie time for the usefulness of this report. The scope of our services did not include a gmundwater study and was Blasted to the performance of percolation telling and the submitted of the data only. Our services did not include those associated with an Environmental Site Assessment for the presence or absence of hazardous and/or toxic materials in the sail, groundwater, or atmosphere; or the presence of wetlands. Any statements, or absence of statements, in this report regarding odors, unusual or suspicious iterns, or coudidails ohgerved, are strictly for descriptive purposes and are aot intended to convey en&eering judgment regarding potential hazardous and/or toxic assessment. The geotechnical engineering information preseated herein is based upon professional interpretation utilizing standard engineering practices. The work conducted through the course of tlxis investigation, including the preparatiol) of Ihis report, have been performed in accordance: with the generally accepted standards of geotedmical engineering practice, which existed in the geographic area at the time the report was written. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. It is not Warranted that such Wormation and interpretation cannot be superseded by future geol:echnical engineering devcIoprnents. We emphasize that This report is valid for the proieet outlined above and should not be used for any oilier sites. Off res Serving The Wutern United States 4171 $riche// Sired, Ontario, Califomia 91741 * (909) 9744400. ram (909) 974.4022 1 I1.0036 La Quin[v Pcm #2 KA Na If 2-0703§ Page 4 of 4 If You have any7 Gfiomre§ardina the services £Ofn d or the data ruportedhercin, or ƒwcmay fiber assistance, please do nothesitate b CORtact Ourof m) 4-44. ■espe,tffilylbmitte% KRAZAN a ASS INC. NA C- S S P r o En Project o « rO No, 842 A / � &P�� � r'Uxr &tiadimes m: Flga2 t Site P W Rewlts of P2 !laiQTmU Boring Logs ?650 ! P�¥tM LVOIRCE N 22 � + : Offices Serving The Western UnitedraJos aMar 51mcl. 00mic, Cal md;mm1•(a) q 4e•h (909)9 744022 12ma La%aRrc£ - - — - - — - - -s`�' �� - - ����=• cam,:---'�''� ,a� 17xy � w � +* ! ' '_ ' aIIlCllllll ° x 1 z- * s 'p r o AW r I�IICJIIC*" 0 u; i I Oil G :r J u i hl � + 3 41I i � r� f{{ f i { � 9 U 6 { ' # +� M5 • ''i1 f f .' f {f ' � LL U L o - -T "o .' ,i LL rrr Fa • d I ryJjl'-J111I�-IIr` I ■ �/ f fFf f f ft } X 7 wLLLLI�J�ff.I411ULLLL�i� �IJI�C1C11111 Il�fl � '" �� = + .-t • + + + t t .-.-- - - i ST ITf..L l�J. Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Leg of Drill Hie B-17 Project No. 112-07036 Client- Regency Carders Locatian: La Quint2, CA Depth to Water> SUBSURFACE PROFILE 6 Description Initial: a � 0 GFOurrd Surface SILTY SAND (SM), fine grained, tight brawn, siighlly rmolsl StUYSANDISAND (SMI.SP), fine to medium grained. light brown, slightly moist ILTYSANDISAND (SMISP), fine grained, brawn, sllghtty midst, medium dense 8 10 SAND (Sr ). very fine grained, yoliow-Ian, slightly moist, mediurn 12 dense SILTY SAND (S", 14 medium to coarse grained, tan, medium dense SILTY SANDISAND (SWSP), flne to medlum grained. light brown. slightly moist 18 SIL Ty .SANrJI,SAhID (S11�1Sr° , 20flne grained, tan -brown 22 SAID (SP), medium to coarso grained, light brOWnr dense 24 4 SAND (SP), medium to Co2�rse greinad, light brown, dt�nse 20 End of UorshoJe 28 Total Depth = 25' No groundwater was encountered during driiliN Hale backfilled with soil cultlrigs and tamped als�ol� Drill Method: Hallow Stern Auger Drill RIg: CME55 F ratan and Associates Driller: JG Figure No.,. A-17 Logged By: VVP At Completion; SAMPLE Water Content (O'a) 7 � CL O 10 20 30 40 Drill Date: 06126108 Hole .size: 5" Elevation: See Site Flerl Sheet; 1 of 1 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Client: Regency Centers Locaffon: La Qufnta, CA Depth to Water> SU13SURFACE PROFILE 2 1 j Desc6pflon .0 C3 OL E IV ;�' V) 15� 1 'D SIL TY SAND (SU), fine grained, light bown, slightly moist SIL" SANDISAND (SUSP, fine grained, light brown, slightly VnDiSt 4- SILTY SA NDISA ND (SWSP), fine grained, brmm, slightly moisl 10 -� I 12- SAND (SP), fine grained, Yellow -tan, slightly nio[st 14 Log of Drill Hole 13-18 Inifia(: fib SILTY SANDISAND (SWSP), fine to coarse grained. light brown, slightly moist 18- S'L Ty SA'VL' (SM)r fine gained, ian-brown 20- 22 SAND (SP), merflum grairted. Ught brown 241, 2 6 SAND (Spr m meddium to cixirse grained, light yellow, dense 213- 30- Drill Method: HoffoW Stern Auger Drill Rig: CME 55 DOW, JCS Projer-t No: 112-07036 F[guro No.: A-18 Logged By: WF At Completion: SAMPLE Watcr Content (%) Z' F CL ID 20 20 40 Krazan and Associates J —i Drill Date, 06126108 Hole 81... 8" Elevation: See Site PIELrj Shent: I oF2 Project: Proposed Jefferson Square Client: Regency Centers Location: La Quin[a. CA Log of Drill Hole B-18 Project No: 112-07036 Figure No.: A-18 Lagged F3y; VUP J Depth to Water> Initial: At Completion: Drill Method: H 011OW Stern Auger Drill Rig: CME 55 i ratan and Associates Drill Date: 06126108 Hole Size: 6' Driller, JG Elevation; See Site Plan Sheet: 2 of 2 project: Proposed Je>rerson grr8re l . Client: Regency CenEors Location: La Quinta, CA Death to Water> SUBSURFACE PROFILE _ Description .d 0 Lh Log of Drill Mole B-19 Initial-, iyrounLi 5t dace SILTY SAND (SM), fine grained. Ilght brown. slightly m-Dist SIL iY SANDISA ND (SPdISP), tine to medium grained, light brown, slightly moist 4 SfLry SAND {mmj, fine drained, brown, slightly moist 8 SAND (SP), 12 line grained, yellow -tan, slightly moist, dense SA-TY SANDISAND (SMISP), 14 medium 10 coarse grained, lan, dense fi Slur SANDISAND (SMp), fine to medium grained, light brown, slightly maid 78 S!L?'YSANDISAND (SMISP), rpne grained, brawn -tan 20 f 22 SAND (SP), medium grained, light brown. dense 24 26 End of borehole iotal Depth = 25' 28 _ No groundwater was oncounlared during drilling Hole WGUlled wlth sail cuttings end tamped 06120)8 3a Dri I Method; Hollow Stern Auger Drill Rig. CiNE 55 I7rlller: J SAMPLE a Project No: 112-07036 Figure No.: A-19 Logged By, WP At Completion: Water Conlen# e � � C+ � I -4- A _ Krazan and Associates Drill Date: 061 6108 Hole Size: 6" Elevation. See Site Plan Sheet: I of 1 RESULTS OF PERCOLAT Prc'i�ct 9 112-07036 Pro eet blame ,lef€er50rl UrB Project Address Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive Test Nn: P-0 Total Depth 13 fee De th To Water 10 feet Soil lassif+cation SM Leading 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 i0 11 12 13 14 18 c 7 ro 4 . 0 0 CL O.U0 Elasped Time(min.) 0 MOD 20,00 30.00 60.00 90.OD 120-00 150.00 180.00 240.00 300.00 360.00 ON TESTS Date RLcharaes Incremental Time Gallons to (min.) keep Canstant Head 0-00 0.0 0.00 0.2 10.00 0-4 10.00 0-6 30.00 0-7 30.O0 1 A 30.00 1, 4 30.00 1,6 30-00 1.8 60-00 2.2 60-00 2.8 60,00 3.1 I Percolation Rate In inches per Hour P-1 July 3. 2008 24 hr Pre -sat Test Size 16 inches Gaffons-f hours JMOGalsl6hrs incremental Percolation Rats (inlhr) 60.00 120,00 180 , U 0 240.00 300.O o 360.00 420.00 Time (minutes) 9,8 8.2 5.7 6.0 5.7 5.2 4.9 4-5 4.5 4.2 Project # 112-07036 Project Name Jetfefson Square Project Address Jefferson Street and Fred Test No- P-6 Total Dapth To Water i0 feet Js0il C Reading Slart 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 �0 �1 12 13 14 15 14 �. 13 9 ' 91 - .� 10 �- 8 - :' 7ca - t 6 c 0 - o 4 U - CL 0 0.00 Elasped T€me(mina 0 10,00 20.IJf1 30.00 00.00 90.00 120_DO 150.00 180.00 240,00 300.00 360,00 LTS OF PERC Drive Ah 113 feet siftation ISM Incremental Time Gallons to (min, keep Constant -lead 0.00 0.0 10,00 0.3 10.OD 0.6 10.00 0.8 30.00 1.3 30.00 1.8 30.00 2.0 30,00 2,3 30,00 18 60.00 lf18 3.0 00.00 3.3 60.00 n R-ate in Inches per Hour Pit Date July 3, 2008 Recharges 124 hr pre-s o Lu rate d Test Size inches Gallons ! Fours 3.75 Cants 16 hrs Incremental Percolation Foote (infhrj 12.3 13.5 13.1 10.2 8.2 7.4 7.5 0.1 5.3 5.1 60,00 120,00 180,00 40.00 300.00 360,00 420,00 Time (mfrtutes) 5A LL T-- Project # 112-D7036 Project tame Jefferson Square Project Address Je fersOR Street and Fred Waring Drive Test NO: 1 P-6 Total Depth 13 feet Aepth To Water I 10 feet JSON Massificataorl M Reading EIasped Incremental Time Gallons to 7`ime(rnin.) (min. ) keep Constant Head Start 0 0-00 -0 fi D-00 10.00 0.3 3 20.00 10-00 0,6 4 30.00 10-00 0.9 5 60.00 3D-00 1.3 90.00 30.00 1.6 7 120.00 30.00 2.1 150.00 30.00 2,8 9 180.00 30.00 3-1 10 40-00 60,00 3-6 11 300-00 C0.00 4-1 12yy 360-00 60.00 4,7 FJ 14 1 Percolation Rate to Inches Per Hour ,� 'f 5 14 13 1 :3 7 0= 0 4 0 2 c� 4 'f Q3 IL V �'y {j 0-00 P- Date Recharnes Test Size Gallons f hours July 3, 2008 24 Ear ore -sal 6 inches 4-75 Gais { 6 hrs Incremental Percolation Rate (in1hr) 0,00 120,00 180.00 240.00 300,00 360.00 420,00 Time (minutes) 14.7 14-7 10.6 8-7 8-6 8.6 S,4 7.1 6.7 6.s JAM-04-200S 13:34 EIAU I FO-CHEM, [N0 13095905905 P. C2/0? Envirc - Chem, Inc. 1214 P. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 917 Tel 09) 590-5S Fax (90s) 590-5907 LABORATORY REPORT C ST R: KrdZ n & A$sociatas. I1C. 4221 Brickell St. Ontario, CIL 9176L Te2(949)574-4400 Va%(909)974-4022 PROJECT: La Qua MATRXX;SDIIo DATE RECEIVED:07 p1 2f0$ SAMPLING DATE: 121 4107 DATE ANALYZW; 91 0 -03 08 REPORT TO : i+T . SCOTi' KELLOGG DATE REPORTED : AI J 04 / 0 8 - AMPLE I.D.: 112-07036 1 8-160-3' LAB ID'- T- --- »-- 0$0102-1 EPA PAfRUXIETER SXWIrE R=ULT UNIT PQIj DF MMOD SISTIVI 2460 OHMS -CM 100000li - MAI TRANS SULFATE 268 MG1KQ 10 1 EPA 9038 CHLORIDE _ 11,7 10 1 EPA R253 nH 7.52 I'1' - -- EPA 9045C COD'S DF = DILUTION FACTCM E42L = PRACTICAL QUANTITATION LIMIT ACTUAL DETECTION LIMIT = DF x PQL XGIK ; NII-LIGRAN PER KILCGRkM = PPM ()HMS -CM = CHM-CEWIMETER RESISTIVITY = 1/C!0 XDU jV3:TY ' = HIGH L T DATA REVIEWED AN1] APPROVED BY: CAL-DHS ELAP CERTIFICATE No.: 1555 'ar INC, �� & �iSSDC1ATE5, _ GEOTECNNI AL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENrAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION July 12, 2008 Mx. Thomas Middleton Regency Centers Inc. 36 Executive Park, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92614 RE: Report Update Proposed Shopping Center Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive La Quinta, California Dear Mr. Middleton: KA Project No. 1 I2-07036 Based on our review of the above referenced Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report and recen€ site visit, the above mentioned report is considered.. from a geotechnical standpoint, to remain valid for the proposed development. The recommendations and ]imitations provided in the geotechnical engineering investigation report and all subsequent letters apply to this proiect. If you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (909) 974-4400. Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATE i LG r Top+i R stophe QW, G Rc75ft� Project G logist d PG No. 8420 Irla. U20 CR17MK: rm Qf' CkLk cG 3att]e�: M. Kellogg, Project Engineer RCE No. 65092 Offices Sera ng The Western United States 4271 13r-ickeli Str"I + Ontario, CA 91761 ■ (909) A74--4400 ■ Fax (909) 974-402? & A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION  Offices Serving The Western United States 4221 Brickell Street • Ontario, CA 91761 • (909) 974-4400 • Fax (909) 974-4022 August 4, 2008 KA Project No. 112-07036 Mr. Thomas Middleton Regency Centers Inc. 36 Executive Park, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92614 RE: Report Update Proposed Shopping Center Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive La Quinta, California Dear Mr. Middleton: Based on our review of our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report dated May 25, 2007, all subsequent letters, and recent site visit, the above mentioned report is considered, from a geotechnical standpoint, to remain valid for the proposed development. The recommendations and limitations provided in the geotechnical engineering investigation report and all subsequent letters apply to this project. If you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (909) 974-4400. Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Christopher Robinson, PG James M. Kellogg, PE Project Geologist Project Engineer PG No. 8420 RCE No. 65092 CR/JMK:rm dd.A.KraZaZ & ASSOCIATES,INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION 'TESTING & INSPECTION May 30, 2008 Mr. Thomas Middleton Regency Centers, Inc. 36 Executive Park, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92614 RE: Addendum Letter Proposed Jefferson Square (Phase 1) Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive La Quinta, California Dear Mr. Middleton: KA Project No. 112-07036 In accordance with Development Resource Consultants, Inc. request, we are supplying this letter to clarify recommendations and requirements as they pertain to the geotechnical aspects of the project. Comment 1 "Fill Placement: on page 8, fill material is called out to be placed at 95% relative compaction. This is often difficult to achieve in the field and exceeds the more common requirement of 90% relative compaction for general fill. Please confirm your recommendations." Response to Comment 1 The on -site soils consist of sandy material, and such, it is our experience that these soils can be placed at a relative compaction of 95% with reasonable compaction effort. Comment 2 "Floor Slabs: On page 10 of the soils report, the recommendations is for floor slabs with 3 inches of compacted gravel, 3/ inch maximum size, below a vapor retarder sheeting and 2 " to 4 " of sand on top. Typical installations use sand, in lieu of gravel, to avoid puncturing the vapor barrier (2 " sand — vapor barrier — 2 " sand, is a common section). Please Clarify the recommended section. " Response to Comment 2 It is our recommendation that a capillary break be used, 4 inches of sand with a vapor barrier placed below the slabs -on -grade. The placement is at the discretion of the project owner. It is our understanding that the project owner does not intend to use a vapor barrier beneath the slabs -on -grade. The placement of the vapor barrier is our recommendation and not a requirement. If the vapor barrier system is eliminated, Krazan has no liability with regards to issues associated with moisture vapor transmission Offices Serving The Western United States 4221 Brickell Street, Ontario, California 91761 • (909) 974-4400 • Fax: (909) 974-4022 KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 2 Comment 3 Floor Slabs: The soils report does not make a recommendation for the minimum thickness of the concrete floor slab. Please add this to your report. Response to Comment 3 The thickness of the slabs must be determined by the structural engineer and the criteria he determines impacts the slab. It is our recommendation that a minimum slab thickness of five inches (5") with number three bars (#3) reinforcement, eighteen inches (18") on center, each way be placed. Comment 4 Pavement Design: The Developer would like to use Crushed Miscellaneous Base (CMB) in lieu of Class 2 Aggregate Base. I would recommend using Greenbook Standard Specification Section 200-2.4, 2006 edition, for CMB, unless an alternative Caltrans Specification is Available. Please Confirm this substitution changes the recommended pavement sections shown in Table on Page 12 of the Soils Report. Response to Comment 4 It is our recommendation that Class 2 Base be used. The placement and type of base used is at the discretion of the project owner. It is the project Civil Engineer's design that determines the actual needed thickness based on the proposed design loads for the pavement sections. It is recommended that if CMB is used in lieu of Class 2 Aggregate Base, then Green -book Standard Specification Section 200- 2.4, 2006 edition be followed. Comment 5 Pavement Design: What is the life span of the current recommended pavement sections shown in the Table on page 12 of Soils Report? Response to Comment 5 The life span of the pavement section shown on Page 12 of the Initial Geotechnical investigation is 20 years. This considers regular and routine maintenance of the pavement areas. Comment 6 Pavement Design: The project will widen Fred Waring Drive as part of the Required Official Site Improvements. The City has Assigned a Traffic Index of 9 for this Major Arterial Street with a minimum section 5.5"AC over 6.5"CAB, based on an R-value of 50. I would like Krazan to confirm that the City's Minimum pavement section is appropriate for design purposes. Attached is a copy of the City's Structural section for AC paving" Handout. Response to Comment 6 The recommended minimum thickness of the AC and CAB was outlined in the initial geotechnicai investigation based on an R-value of 50. The City's minimum thickness for a traffic index of 9 is greater than our recommendation. The minimum thickness of the AC and AB should be equal to or greater than Offices Serving The Western United States 4221 Brickell Street, Ontario, California 91761 • (909) 974-4400 • Fax: (909) 974-4022 Review letter KA No. 112-07036 Page No. 3 the City's minimum requirements. Our report listed a recommendation only, and it is the discretion of the project owner to meet or exceed our recommendations. The city that has jurisdiction over the project has the right to specify any requirement equal or greater than our recommendation, and those requirements should be followed as to conform to the local jurisdictions requirements and interpretation of the IBC or CBC or any addendum of said jurisdiction. Comment 7 City Review Comments: The precise Grading Plan First check submittal to the City of La Quinta was returned to us with Comments to the Krazan Soils Report. Attached with this letter are the Original comments provide to us by the City. Please Address these comments and provide us with a letter that we can submit to the City for 2"d Plan Check. Include with this letter should be city plan check comments. Response to Comment 7 Attached is the addendum letter to the City of La Quinta Plan Review Comments. The recommendations and limitations provided in the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation report apply to this letter. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (909) 974-4400. Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Project G�761( PG No. 8420 CR/]MK:rm cc: Addressee (4) S\a G 0 4 0� a t Rio.8422J s 0 Exp.�� C es M. Kellog Project Manager RCE No. 65092 Offices Serving The Western United States 4221 Brickell Street, Ontario, California 91761 • (909) 974-4400 • Fax: (909) 974-4022 Review letter DRC May 16, 2008 Mr. James Kellogg Krazan & Associates, Inc. 4221 Brickell Street Ontario, CA 91761 Tel. 909-974-4400 Development Resource Consultants, Inc. Civil Engineering • Land Surveying • Land Planning RE: Jefferson Square, La Quinta, SWC Jefferson St. & Fred Waring Dr. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation - Request for Information Dear Jim: Job No. C07-304 DRC is requesting clarification of the following items in your Geotechnical Engineering Investigation (Soils Report) dated May 25, 2007 (Krazan Project No. 112-07036): 1. Fill Placement. On Page 8, fill material is called out to be placed at 95% relative compaction. This is often difficult to achieve in the field and exceeds the more common requirement of 90% relative compaction for general fill. Please confirm your recommendation. 2. Floor Slabs. On Page 10 of the Soils Report, the recommendation is for a floor slabs with 3 inches of compacted gravel, 9l-inch maximum size, below a vapor retarder sheeting and 2" to 4" of sand on top. Typical installations use sand, in lieu of the gravel, to avoid puncturing the vapor barrier (2" sand — vapor barrier — 2" sand, is a common section). Please clarify the recommended section. 3. Floor Slabs. The Soils Report does not make a recommendation for the minimum thickness of the concrete floor slab. Please add this to your report. 4. Pavement Design. The Developer would like to use Crushed Miscellaneous Base (CMB) in lieu of Class 2 Aggregate Base. I would recommend using Greenbook Standard Specification Section 200-2.4, 2006 Edition, for CMB, unless an alternative Caltrans Specification is available. Please confirm if this substitution changes the recommended pavement sections shown in the Table on Page 12 of the Soils Report. 5. Pavement Design. What is the life span of the current recommended pavement sections shown in the Table on Page 12 of Soils Report? & Pavement Design. The Project will widen Fred Waring Drive as part of the required off -site improvements. The City has assigned a Traffic Index of 9 for this Major Arterial Street with a minimum section 5.5" AC over 6.5" CAB, based on an R-Value of 50. 1 would like Krazan to confirm that the City's minimum pavement section is appropriate for design purposes. Attached is a copy of the City's "Structural Section for AC Paving" handout. 800 S. ROCHESTER AVENUE • SUITE 4C • ONTARIO, CA 91761 • PHONE: 909-230-5241 • FAX: 909-230-5246 ANAHEIM HILLS ONTARIO LAS VEGAS VALENCIA CORONA Mr. James Kellogg May 15, 2008 Page 2 7. City Review Comments. The Precise Grading Plan first check submittal to the City of La Quinta was returned to us with comments to the Krazan Soils Report. Attached with this letter are the original comments provided to us by the City. Please address these comments and provide us with a letter that we can submit to the City for 2nd plan check. Included with this letter should be city plan check comments. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Development Resource Consultants, Inc. /T Ronald W. Sklepko, P.E. Vice President RWShws Kellogg Jim Krazan b01.051608.doc c: Tom Middleton, Regency Centers Rob Grant, Regency Centers Mike Flynn, KTGY Architects & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECI-INICAt ENGINEERING a ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION May 34, 20fl8 OvDv Mr. Thomas Middleton�� Regency Centers Inc. 36 Executive Park, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92614 RE: Addendum Letter # 2 Proposed Shopping Center Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive La Quinta, California Dear Mr. Middleton: KA Project No. 1 1 2-07036 C In accordance with your request and authorization, this letter has been prepared in order to respond to comments provided by the city of La Quinta following review of the Geotechnical Eagineering Investigation Report prepared for the subject site. The referenced review sheet provided to our office is dated May 30, 2009. These comments were provided to our office by a representative of DRC Engineering. Following are our response to those comments considered applicable to our firm. Comment No. 6: Krazan Geotech Report and current letter dated March 21, 2008 a. "Liquefaction historic i. oundwater elevation is not provided (2rrd requesi). Greo states low but if historic is higher than probably significant. Please address what the historic 3vater table is. Either get ft from CYWD (760-398-2661 or Afvoma Durres Mutual ii"ctter Co. (760-345-2694), 1 am not sure which one has authoriti, here. " According to CVWD, the historic groundwater elevation for the 3 closest wells to the: site is listed below: Average Depth Historical Year of to Ground Ground Water Reading for Township Range Section Quad Water (2007) Historical Below Ground Depth Closest to Ground Water Surface (BGS) Ground Surface T 5S R 7E 20 A 177.8 Feet BGS 140.7 Feet BGS 2004 T 5S R 7E 20 G 201.8 Feet BGS 154.0 Feet BGS 2000 `f 5S R 7E 20 H 185.0 Feet BGS 168.2 Feet BGS 2006 Offices Senina The Western United States 43379 Business Park Drive, Suite 300 ■ Temecula, CA 92590 ■ (951) 694-0601 ■ Fax (951 694-0701 KA Project No. 112-07036 Page No. 2 b. "Subsidence for volume caics seem very low (0.02 ft). Has this been correlated with develop►nena around the vicinity? Note, Project across Fred Waring had import volumes that increased. (Esplanade back in 2003). It is requested that the soils engineer define "subsidence " which should reflect lowering from fire existing. " Subsidence does not apply to the volume calculation of the imported fill. The Civil engineer should determine the import volume calculations. Subsidence is defined as ground surface or soil material shifting downward relative to the existing datum. In other words, this state's how much the existing soils will consolidate when the imported fill material is compacted on top of these in -situ materials. c. "95% compaction requirement is above the typical 90ra far this area. It is requested to indicate on theplans that 95% compaction is required.for these structural fills within the building areas ". It is Krazan & Associates recommendation that any fill be compacted to a minimum of 95% relative density. The sandy soils present at the site can be typically compacted to 95% relative density. d. "In the March 21 letter from Krazan. the georech addressed past comment 14 bur does not address existing walls, structures, pool....ete as requested. Please address this issue especially near- the retention areas like the park and section C area where the existing residential area exist. Also, northeast corner signal poles, sidewalks .... etc. " The proposed development should not impact any existing structures or improvement if the recommendations of the initial geotechnical investigation report (May 25, 2007) and all subsequent addendums and letters are considered in the design and construction of the project. e. " 77te soils report indicates that sulfate containing. soils were found to be low on the site but import is required. The soil engineer should provide information on proper import specifications. " It is recommended that any soils import for use as engineered fill shall be tested for sulfate content. It is recommended that the soils that are to be used for engineered fill contain negligible sulfate content according to ACI 318 Building Code. If you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (951)694-0601. Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATE 1 Ch ' _ op er s P Project Geologt 44 PG No. 842G D Cli/JMK:nll CC,. Addressee (4) I,- ( a a INC. q A I_ �4z tjject. Manager p IgtSl C .. n RCE No. 65092 No. 842-0 ,c- Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Westem United States SoH Report Re vinsa Letter N 2 �==-�'��KraZan & ASSOCIATES, INC GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ■ ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION September 18, 2008 KA No.: 126-08033 Regency Centers Mr. Tom Middleton 36 Executive Park, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92614 RE: Response to City of La Quinta Request For information Proposed Jefferson Square (Phase I) Fred Waring & Jefferson La Quinta, CA Reference: Geoteehnical Engineering Investigation, Proposed Jefferson Square (Phase 1), Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, La Quinta, California, dated May 25, 2007. Mr. Middleton: In accordance with your authorization, we have prepared this letter to response to a request for information by the City of La Quinta. Based on information provided by the project Civil Engineer, URC Engineering, it is our understanding that the City of La Quinta has requested confirmation that the recommended remedial grading is suitable for the proposed shop buildings to be constructed at the project site. Based on a review of Sheet ST1, General Notes and Details, prepared by KTGY Structural Engineers, a maximum bearing capacity value of 3000 pounds per square foot has been used to design the proposed building foundation. This value is consistent with the recommendations presented in the referenced Geotechnical Engineering Investigation report for the subject site. As a result, the recommended remedial grading provided for the subjects development is considered suitable. We appreciate the opportunity to assist you on this project. If you have any questions regarding the reported test results or require additional information, please contact our office at (951) 694-0601 for assistance. Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 es M. Kellogg, PE Project Engineer ro� fit. i{LG ��.. . C 65092 M., Distribution: (2) Addr EX, 91;'"d A C:111i 7MKIdmw �p�Crt Offices Serving The Western United States 43379 Business Park Drive, Suite 300 ■ Temecula, Cal ifomia 92590 • (951) 694-0601 ■ Fax: (95 t) 694-0701 1razan & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION September 23, 2008 Mr. Thomas Middleton Regency Centers Inc. 36 Executive Park, Suite 100 Irvine. CA 92614 RE: Report Update Letter Proposed Shopping Center Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive La Quinta, California Dear Mr. Middleton: KA Project No. l 12-07036 In accordance with your request, we are providing this Addendum to our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation report (KA Project No. 112-07036) dated May 25, 2007 for the above -referenced project site. This addendum provides additional information to conform with seismic design requirements of the 2007 California Building Code (2007 CSC). The site class, per Table 1613.5.2. 2007 CBC. is based upon the site soil conditions. It is our opinion that a Site Class D is appropriate for building design at this site. For seismic design of the structures, in accordance with the seismic provisions of the 2007 CBC, we recommend the following parameters: 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE Seismic Item Value CBC Reference Site Class D Table 1613.5.2 Fa 1.00 Table 1613.5.3 (1) Ss 1.51 Figure 1613.5 (3) SMS 1.51 Section 1613.5.3 SDS 1.00 Section 1613.5.4 Fv 1.50 Table 1613.5.3 (2) S 1 0.60 Figure 1613.5 (4) SM1 0.90 Section 1613,5.3 SDI 0.60 Section 1613.5.4 The recommendations and limitations provided in our Geotechnical Engineering investigation report (KA Project No. 112-07036) dated May 25, 2007 apply to this letter. With Offices Serving The Western United States 4221 Briekell Street • Ontario, California 91761 • (9)9) 974-4400 • Fax: (909) 974-4022 Rmscd to CBC2007 Icuer.&c KA Project No. 11247036 Page No. ? If you have any questions. or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (909) 974-4400. Respectfully submitted, FCRAZA-N & ASSOCIATES, MC. o - bPHER P C sto a 1, NSON Ur' Projec anag 4. No, t CrrRTIFIED # [ -L.C,- 1Vn25 . F-14G1NEERIN GEOLOGIST F Krnzan & Assurintes, iue. With OrRm Nerving lire We -quern �Ini[c4 Sta[cs WK4 to coves o hdt� a. EOr,ECMr ICat ENGINEERING . ENVIRONMENTAL fNGINEER1N6 CONSTRUCTION TESTINC & INSPECTiON September 25, 2008 Regency Centers Mi-. Tom Middleton 36 ExocutiYe pawl,, Saito 100 Irvine, CA 92614 RE: Response to City of La Quinta Request For information Jeffersou Square ReLail Center Proposed Shop Duildiogs Fred Waring & Jefferson La Quinta, CA K1A Ian.: 126-08033 Refen%nco: G eoteehnical Engineering Investigation, Proposed Jefferson Square (Phase I), Jefferson Street and Fred We ring Drive, La Quin [a, California, dated May 25, 2007. Mr. Middleton: fn accordarim with your request and authoftmzion, we have prepared this letter to respond to a request For information by the City of La Quiiuta. used on information pros ided by the project Civil Engineer, DRC Engineering, it is our understanding that the City of La Quinta has requested confirmation that the recommended remedial grading is suitable for the proposed shop buildings to be constructed at the project site. In addition, it is our understanding that the city has requested confirmation that the anticipated long term settlement of the proposed structures wiII be within the anticipated tolerable Limits. Based on a review of Sheet STI, General Notes and Details, prepared by KTGY Structural En&cars, a maximum bearing capacity value of 3000 pounds per square foot has been used to design the proposed building foundation. This value is consistent with the recommendations presorted in the reWenc4d GeotechnicaI En&eerirtg Investigation report for the subject site. As a result, fire n=jnmended remedial grading provided for the subjects development is coasidered suitable. The Iong term settlement of the proposed shop buildings is anticipated to be within the limit; presented in the referenced Gcotnchnical Engineering Investigation report as we]l. We appreciate the opportunity to assist you on this project If you have any questions regarding the reported test results or require additional informatiolti please contact our office at (951 ) 694-0601 for assistance. Respectfully submitted, Project Engines RCE 65092 JI Wdmw Christop Q i HE SON Project cola ill F,ia.• 2503 -i CE0 2503 + CE WIficu • ENGINEERING WA GEOL�COSQIST OF OI%s Serving The Western United States 43379 Business Park Ddvo. Suite 3Olt • 'remetula. California 925M s (951) 694-0601 a Fax- (951) 694-0701 Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Initial Study August 2018 -99- Appendix D Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment Archaeological Monitoring Report APR 15 2009 CITY OF LA Q[JFNTA ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING REPORT JEFFERSON SQUARE PROJECT Jefferson Street and Bred Waring Drive City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California For Submittal to: Planning Department City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Prepared for: Tom Middleton Regency Realty Group, Inc. 36 Executive Park, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92614 Prepared by: CRM TECH 1016 E. Cooley Drive, Suite A I B Colton, CA 92324 Bai "Tom" Tang, Principal Investigator Michael Hagan, Principal Investigator April 8,. 2009 CRM TECH Contract No. 2263 NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATABASE INFORMATION Author(s): Josh Smallwood, Archaeologist/ Report Writer Consulting Firm: CRM TECH 1016 E. Cooley Drive, Suite A / B Colton, CA 92324 (909) 824-6400 Date: April 8, 2009 Title: Archaeological Monitoring Report: Jefferson Square Project, Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California For Submittal to: Planning Department City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 (760) 777-7125 Prepared for: Tom Middleton Regency Realty Group, Inc. 36 Executive Park, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92614 (951) 695-8671 USGS Quadrangle: La Quinta, Calif., 7.5' quadrangle (Section 20, T5S R7E, San Bernardino Base Meridian) Project Size. Approximately 11 acres Keywords: City of La Quinta, County of Riverside; Coachella Valley region; archaeological monitoring of grading activities; Assessor's Parcel No. 604.521-005; Site 33-001769/CA-RN-1769 (prehistoric habitation debris); possible human cremation remains; no substantial adverse effect on a "historical resource" MANAGEMENT SUMMARY Since August 2008, at the request of Regency Realty Group, Inc., CRM TECH has completed an archaeological monitoring program during earth -moving operations for the Jefferson Square project, a commercial development in the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. The project area, Assessor's. Parcel No. 604-521-005, is located on the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, in the northeast quarter of Section 20, T5S R7E, San Bernardino Base Meridian. It encompasses a portion of Site 33-001769, a prehistoric archaeological site that was first ,recorded in the 1970s and subsequently studied through a"series of Phase I and Phase 11 investigations. The monitoring program was required by the City of La pursuant to the California Environmental Quinta, QA) and the Lead Agency for the project, Ordinance. The purpose of the monitoring program is to assist he City and Regency Realty Group Inc.,ric in identifying, evaluating and, if necessary, protecting any subsurface archaeological resources encountered during grading, trenching and other earth --moving operations, as mandated by CEQA and the City ordinance. In order to accomplish these objectives, the site area prior to earth -moving activities CRM TECH conducted a field inspection of excavation process, and completed salvage a provided excavations where prehistoric archaite monitoring eollogiral rout the ema�ns were encountered. The monitoring program resulted in the discovery of a possible human cremation and an isolated pottery sherd, which were encountered at different locations within the project area. The sherd was found near the eastern boundary of the project area, well outside of the boundaries of any previously recorded sites in the vicinity. The cremation remains were found within the recorded. boundaries of Site 33-001769. While Site 33-001769 may have once contained an abundance of prehistoric archaeological remains, the portion of the site that is present within the project area has yielded very little information that would be considered important to the study of the prehistory of the area. With its complete removal, the portion of Site 33-001769 in the project area has no further archaeological data potential. Therefore, the portion of Site 33-001769 in the project area, in general, does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, and does not qualify as a "historical resource," as defined by CEQA. However, the possible human cremation remains found at the site are of great cultural importance to the local Native American community and do appear to qualify as a "historical resource" under CEQA guidelines. With the repatriation and reinterment of the remains during this study, however, the project has not caused a substantial adverse change in the traditional cultural value u the cremation remains. Therefore, the cremation remains, as well as the portion of Site 33-001761 located within the project boundaries, require no further treatment under CEQA or the City ordinance. The isolated pottery sherd, found with no other cultural materials and with no potential to yield important scientific information, is not considered a potential "historical resource," and requires no further consideration. In light of the results and findings of the monitoring program, CRM TECH .presents the following recommendations to the City of La Quinta: ■ The earth -moving operations monitored during this study have not had a substantial adverse effect on any "Historical resources," as defined by CEQA. • The project was carried out in compliance with CEQA provisions on cultural resources and with the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance, and no further archaeological investigations will be necessary within the project area. TABLE OF CONTENTS MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ............................................... i INTRODUCTION ................. ...... .,.,..............,...........,.,.....,.......,...... PROJECT BACKGROUND...................................................................................................... 3 CULTURAL SETTING:............................................................. Prehistory................................................................................................. _ .............................. , .. 4 EthnoMstory......................................................................................................................... 4 History................................................................................... ..................... 5 METHODS AND PROCEDURES............................................................................................... 6 Archaeological Fieldwork..........:................................................ ..................,............ 6 Artifact Analysis..........................................................................................,...........,.... 6 RESULTS AND FiNDiNGS.......................................................................................................,. 6 Archaeological Fieldwork6 Subsurface Excavation...................................................................................................... 7 Reinterment of Cremation Remains ...................................... ,.....,........ 7 Artifact Analysis........................................................................................................................ 7 Summary..... ...................................................................... ......................... 8 DISCUSSION................................................................................................................................. S Definition.................................................................................................................................. 8 Evaluation...................................................... .....................................:.................................. 9 Cremation Remains ................................................:.... .......,....,.............. 9 Isolated Pottery Sherd............................................................... 10 Project Effect Assessment................................................:..... CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................10 REFERENCES..........................................................................................:. . APPENDIX I: PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS .......................... ,,2 ,1 APPENDIX 2: SITE RECORD UPDATE, 33-001769.......................... ..........................................1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project vicinity ................................ ............. ............ .................... ................................ 1 Figure 2. Project area.......................................................................................:.. ... 2 ....................... Figure 3. Aerial image of the project area and vicinity ............................................................. ii INTRODUCTION Since August 2008, at the request of Regency Realty Group, Inc., CRM TECH has completed an archaeological monitoring program during earth -moving operations for the Jefferson Square project, a commercial development in the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California (Fig. 1). The project area, Assessor's Parcel No. 604-521-005, is located on the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, in the northeast quarter of Section 20, T5S R7E, San Bernardino Base Meridian (Figs. 2, 3). It encompasses a portion of Site 33- 001769, a prehistoric archaeological site that was first recorded in the 1970s and subsequently studied through a series of Phase I and Phase II investigations. The monitoring program was required by the City of La project, pursuant to the California Environmental Quanta, as Lead Agency for the Quality Act (CEQA; PRC §21000, et seq.) and the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance (Title 7, La Quinta Municipal Code). The purpose of the monitoring program is to assist the City and Regency Realty Group, Inc., in identifying, evaluating and, if necessary, protecting any subsurface archaeological resources encountered during grading, trenching, and other earth -moving operations, as mandated by CEQA and the City ordinance. In order to accomplish these objectives, CRM TECH conducted a field inspection of the site area prior to earth -moving activities, provided on -site monitoring throughout the grading and excavation process, and completed salvage excavations where prehistoric archaeological remains were encountered. The following report is a complete account of the methods, results, and final conclusion of this study. Figure 1. Project vicinity. (Based. on USGS Santa Ana, Calif., 1:250,000 quadrangle) I :''€ j • (9 ' Bern+uda C3unes ' = � M�[1:.� `•.r} r. •'.l !� -ems=tee_ ��.=- - - l - -'-�' �-=4s:".'iz.. -.�•` �." +rro�c ••• � w-.,�.:.r_.-.-.�±1.. -" "• • gym.;�,.. � r tJ .." . "-: ... "..._... ¢ - � =•j - IP . - F!Alifl7A i]t1Nt~S i y'•• ��'t'i S i U. IA ,E iii y. area �. 610, J BM Sip arty Pell te :a:...... r AVENUEas :.... .. .". - ... f 3 44 r ?r C7,r ��' • 1 f v E\ is 4� S j"'�'. . a ��,Y',.d. �j,'-• ��: p f .ry v.,,/ y EN SCALE 1:24,000 "_- �Y '-;- k E.,j oy 0 1/2 1 mile 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 feet � r -- u•" r• � �.� n Figure 2. Project area. (Based on USGS La Quinta, Calif., 1-24,000 quadrangle) 2 Figure 3. Aerial image of the project area and vicinity. (Based on Riverside County G. PROJECT BACKGROUND As stated above, a portion of a prehistoric --Le., Native American—arrhaeological'szte, 33.. 001769 (CA-R1V-1769), was previously recorded as lying partially within the current project area. The site was first identified in 1971, evaluated in 1979, and determined at that time to be eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places (Brown 1979:7, 40). However, archaeological studies since that time have been unable to relocate much of the cultural materials and features that were initially reported on the property, and thus could not substantiate its eligibility for the National Register on the basis of what little data had been obtained from the site (Apple 1980:14;-Brock and Smith 2000). Subsequent development within the established site boundaries has occurred to the north of Fred Waring -Drive and to the west of the current project area, possibly removing or burying archaeological remains associated with 33-001769, and it is reported that local relic -hunters or concerned individuals may have removed artifacts from the site as well (Apple 1980:11-13; Desautels 1982). None of these, however, has been properly - documented (ibid.). 41 The most recent archaeological study involving the subject property was conducted by the Archaeological Advisory Group (AAG) in 2000, which encompassed a total of roughly 75 acres, including the entire project area and adjoining land on the west and the south (Brock and Smith 2000). That study concentrated on identifying subsurface deposits at or near the recorded location of Site 33-001769 and other sites present within AAG's study area. Extensive test excavations were carried out by trenching with a backhoe in an effort to identify deeply buried archaeological remains and to investigate areas that appeared to have the potential for buried remains, such as mesquite -covered dunes (zbid.:1). AAG's testing program identified a scant amount of cultural materials, suggesting that no potentially significant cultural deposits were present in buries deposits on the subject property. Given the highly sensitive nature of the project area and the probability of encountering cultural materials during future earth -moving activities, however, AAG recommended that archaeological monitoring be conducted during any grading or trenching associated with proposed construction (Brock and Smith 2000:1). The recommendation was adopted by the City of La Quinta, and the present study was undertaken as a result. CULTURAL SETTING PREHISTORY In the history of the Americas, the term "prehistoric period" refers to the time prior to the arrival of non -Indians, when native lifeways and traditions remained intact and viable. In the vicinity of present-day La Quinta, foreign influences began to bring about profound changes to native lifeways around the late 1700s, which ushered in the "historic period." The prehistoric period in the Coachella Valley is generally divided into the Late Prehistoric and the Archaic Periods. The transition between these two. periods is generally considered to be around AD 1000, marked by the introduction of pottery into the region from the Colorado River cultures. For this reason, the Archaic Period is sometimes also referred to as the "pre -ceramic" period. Other important cultural changes in prehistoric times include the introduction of the bow and arrow, probably around AD 500, and the change from burial practices to cremations, perhaps around 500 BC. Students of historical linguistics propose a migration of Takic speakers sometime between 1000 BC and AD 500 from the Great Basin region of Nevada, Utah, and eastern California into southern California: For purposes of this study, the introduction of pottery is used as the margin separating the Archaic Period from Late Prehistoric, although it would also be acceptable to use the other significant events in prehistory. As further archaeological work progresses, in part under the mandate of federal, state, and local historic preservation regulations, the important nodes marking cultural change over past centuries and millennia will become more clearly defined: ETHNOHISTORY The Coachella Valley is a historical center of Native American settlement, where U.S. surveyors noted large numbers of Indian villages and rancherfas, occupied by the Cahuilla 0 people, in the mid-19th century. The Cahuilla, a Takic-speaking people of hunters and gatherers, are generally divided by anthropologists into three groups, according to their geographic setting: the Pass Cahuilla of the San Gorgonio Pass -Palm Springs area, the Mountain Cahuilla of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains and the Cahuilla Valley, and the Desert Cahuilla of the eastern Coachella Valley. The Cahuilla did not have a single name that referred to an all-inclusive tribal affiliation. Instead, membership was in terms of lineages or clans. Each lineage or clan belonged to one of two main divisions of the people, known as moieties. Members of clans in one moiety had to marry into clans from the other moiety. Individual clans had villages, or central places, and territories they called their own, for purposes of hunting game, gathering food, or utilizing other necessary resources. They interacted with other clans through trade, intermarriage, and ceremonies. Population data prior to European contact are almost impossible to obtain, but estimates range from 3,600 to as high as 10,000 persons. During the 19th century, however, the Cahuilla population was decimated as a result of European diseases, mast notably smallpox, for which the Native peoples had no immunity.. Today, Native Americans of Pass or Desert Cahuilla heritage are mostly affiliated with one or more of the Indian reservations in and near the Coachella Valley, including Torres Martinez, Augustine, Cabazon, Agua Caliente, and Morongo. HISTORY In 1823-1825, Josh Romero, josh Maria Estudillo, and Romualdo Pacheco, leading a series of expeditions in search of a route to Yuma, became the first noted European explorers to travel through the Coachella Valley. However, due to its harsh environment, few non - Indians ventured into the desert valley during the Mexican and early American periods, except those who traveled across it along the established trails. The most important among these trails was the Cocomaricopa Trail, an ancient Indian trading route that was "discovered" in 1862 by William David Bradshaw and became known thereafter as the Bradshaw Trail. In much of the Coachella Valley, this historic wagon road traversed a similar course to that of present-day Highway Ill. During the 1860s-1870s, the Bradshaw Trail served as the main thoroughfare between coastal southern California and the Colorado River, until the completion of the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1876-1877 brought an end to its heyday. Non -Indian settlement in the Coachella Valley began in the 1870s, with the establishment of railroad stations along the Southern Pacific Railroad, and spread further in the 1880s, after public land was opened for claims under the Homestead Act, the Desert Land Act, and other federal land laws. Farming became the dominant economic activity in the valley, thanks to the development of underground water sources, often in the form of artesian wells. However, it was not until the completion of the Coachella Canal in 1948-1949 that farmers in the and region obtained an adequate and reliable water supply. The main agricultural staple in the Coachella Valley, the date palm, was first introduced around the turn of the century. By the late 1910s, the date palm industry had firmly established itself, giving the region its celebrated image of "the Arabia of America." 61 Starting in the 1920s, a new industry, featuring equestrian camps, resort hotels, and eventually country clubs, gradually spread throughout the Coachella Valley, and since then transformed it into southern California's leading winter retreat. In today's City of La Quinta, the earliest settlement and land development activities did not occur until the turn of the century. In 1926, with the construction of the La Quints Hotel, the development of La Quinta took on the character of a winter resort, typical of the desert communities along Highway 111. Beginning in the early 1930s, the subdivision of the cove area of La Quinta and the marketing of "weekend homes" further emphasized -this new direction of development. On May 1,1982, La Quinta was incorporated as the 19th city in Riverside County. METHODS AND PROCEDURES ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELDWORK A preliminary field inspection of the project area was performed prior to the commencement of grading activities. The original site maps on file at the Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside, were used to pinpoint the location of Site 33-001769. A reconnaissance -level re -survey was then carried out in and around the site area. On -site monitoring of earth -moving operations was carried out between August and December, 2008, by CRM TECH field director Daniel Ballester and field technician Andrea Stella (see App. 1 for qualifications). The basic field monitoring procedure entailed close observation of grading and trenching activities while inspecting the ground surface as soils were removed and fresh layers were exposed. ARTIFACT ANALYSIS The only artifact collected and removed from the project area during the archaeological field procedures, an isolated pottery sherd found at a depth of approximately six feet below the surface, was transported to the CRM TECH laboratory for -detailed analysis. It was examined by archaeologist Josh Smallwood (see App. 1 for qualifications) to determine clay type--e.g., brownware vs. bu£fware--and, if possible, functional classification—e.g., water jar, storage vessel, cooking pot, or bowl. RESULTS AND FINDINGS ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELDWORK During on -site monitoring of earth -moving operations, a possible cremation and an isolated pottery sherd were encountered at different locations within the project boundaries. The sherd was found near the eastern boundary of the project area, well outside the boundaries of any previously recorded sites in the vicinity. The cremation remains were found within the recorded boundaries of Site 33-001769. After their locations 6 were plotted onto project maps, the cremation remains and the sherd were collected, bagged, and labeled with the appropriate information. The cremation remains were reentered at a nearby location, as discussed below, while the pottery sherd was collected for analysis. Following the completion of all field procedures, the resulting location map and a description of the finds was compiled into a standard site record update form and submitted to the Eastern Information Center (EIQ at the University of California, Riverside, for inclusion in the California Historical Resources Inventory. Subsurface Excavation On August 29, 2008, while scrapers were excavating a retention basin in the northwestern portion of the project area, Andrea Stella encountered an oval -shaped burned spot on the ground at the depth of one meter below the original ground surface. She commenced an archaeological excavation to investigate the feature as a possible cremation under the supervision of field director Daniel Ballester. On September 2, 2008, the excavation confirmed the presence of possible human bone, and the Riverside County Sheriff - Coroner's Office was contacted immediately, as required by standard procedures. Deputy Coroner Deborah Gray visited the site on that same day and identified the remains as non - diagnostic femur or tibia fragments of human size (Case #2008-063-351). She then contacted the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento regarding the find. Reinterment of Cremation Remains On September 10, 2008, Tribal Elder Joe Benitez of the nearby Cabazon Band of Mission Indians visited the site to help formulate the proper treatment of the possible human cremation remains. He requested reinterment of the remains on site at a depth below any future project -related disturbance. Mr. Benitez performed a small ceremony for the remains prior to the interment. Using an excavator, the cremation was reburied in the southwest corner of the project area at a depth of approximately eight feet below the surface, in an area designated for landscaping. The location was plotted onto project maps for inclusion in the site record update form. ARTIFACT ANALYSIS Ceramic analysis revealed that the isolated pottery sherd is of the buffware variety, pinkish in color, with very fine paste, and very fine-grain temper with almost no sand. It is a slightly curved rim sherd that appears to be from a bowl nearly six inches (approx.15 cm) in diameter, with a recurved rim and rounded, overlapping lip. The lip was constructed using a pinch method. The sherd exhibits striations from shaping and finishing, and is smooth on the exterior but somewhat bumpy and crude on the interior, suggesting it was purely functional and not necessarily decorative. Based on its morphology and descriptions of pottery vessels in ethnographic literature, the sherd may be from a cooking or food serving bowl (Campbell 1999:120-121). The cultural material found during this study, including both the cremation remains and the isolated pottery sherd, was recovered from dune -sand deposits lying above the lakebed clay sediments of ancient Lake Cahuilla, and thus likely post-date the last high stand of the lake (ca. AD 1680). V1 SUMMARY The possible human cremation was found within the recorded boundaries of Site 33- 001769, at a depth of one meter below the original ground surface. The isolated pottery sherd was found near the eastern boundary of the project area, well outside the established boundaries of any previously recorded sites in the vicinity. The sherd and the cremation have added no new information to existing knowledge of Site. 33--001769 or of prehistoric lifeways in this part of the Coachella Valley. However, the possible human cremation remains are undoubtedly of great cultural importance to the local Native American community.. The remains were properly treated and repatriated to the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians. Reinterment of the remains at a new location insures that they will be kept safe and undisturbed during any future construction activities associated with the project. DISCUSSION Based on the results of the monitoring program discussed above, the following sections present CRM TECH's conclusion on whether any "historical resources," as defined by CEQA, were impacted by the monitored earth -moving operations. DEFINMON According to PRC §5020.1(j), "'historical resource' includes, but is not limited to, any object, building, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or archaeologically significant, or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California." More specifically, CEQA guidelines state that the term "historical resources" applies to any such resources listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, included in a local register of historical resources, or determined to be historically significant by the Lead Agency (Title 14 CCR §15064.5(a)(1)-(3)). Regarding the proper criteria of historical significance, CEQA guidelines mandate that "a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be 'historically significant' if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources" (Title 14 CCR §15064.5(a)(3)}. A resource may be listed in the California Register if it meets any of the following criteria: (1) is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage. (2) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. (3) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. (4) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. (PRC §5024.1(c)) A local register of historical resources, as defined by PRC §5020.1(lc), "means a list of properties officially designated or recognized as historically significant by a local N. government pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution." For properties within the City of La Quinta, the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance (Title 7, La Quinta Municipal Code) provides for the establishment of a historic resources inventory as the official local register. A property may be considered for inclusion in the historic resources inventory based on one or more of the following: A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering or architectural history; or B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state or national history, or C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, =genous riod or method of •construction, is a valuable example of the use of materials or craftsmanship or is representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer or architect; or D. It is an archaeological, paleontological, botanical, geological; topographical, ecological or geographical site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value; or E. It is a geographically definable area possessing concentration of sites, buildings, structures, improvements or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be greater than the value of each individual improvement. (LQMC §7.06.020) Pursuant to these statutory and regulatory guidelines, the isolated pottery sherd and the cremation remains encountered during this study are evaluatedunderboth the criteria. for the California Register and those for the City of La Quinta's historic resources inventory. The results of the evaluation are discussed below. EVALUATION Cremation Remains As discussed above, the possible human cremation was found within the boundaries of Site 33-001769, which was -previously determined to be eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places (Brown 1979:7, 40). However, subsequent studies have been unable to substantiate the determination of eligibility on what little data had been obtained from the site (Apple 1980.14; Brock and Smith 2000), and a recent study suggests that no potentially significant buried cultural deposits were present within the current project area (Brock and Smith 2000). While Site 33-001769 may have once contained an abundance of prehistoric archaeological remains, the portion of the site that is present within the project area today has yielded very little information that would be considered important to the study of the prehistory of the area. With its complete removal, the portion- of Site 33-001769 in the project area has no further archaeological data potential. Therefore, the portion of Site 33-001769 in the project area, in general, does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources; and does not qualify as a "historical resource," as defined above. However, the possible human cremation remains found at the site are- of great cultural importance to the local Native American community, as demonstrated by the participation I by the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians in the treatment of the remains during this study. Based on its traditional cultural value, the cremation feature found during this study, individually, qualifies as a "historical resource" under CEQA guidelines. Isolated Pottery Sherd As mentioned above, the isolated pottery sherd was discovered outside the boundaries of any previously recorded sites in the vicinity. It was found with no other associated cultural materials and within soils attributed to the last high stand of Lake Cahuilla and more recent dune formations. Occurring out of depositional context, an isolate by definition does not constitute .an archaeological site, and is thus not considered a potential "historical resource," as defined by CEQA. PROJECT EFFECT ASSESSMENT Since the possible human cremation feature found within the boundaries of Site 33-001769 meets the statutory and regulatory definition of a "historical resource," CEQA mandates that any "demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration" that would impair its significance or integrity be considered a "significant effect on the environment" (PRC §5020.1(q); §21084.1). During this study, the cremation remains were removed from their original location. However, the remains were repatriated to the appropriate Native American group, namely the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, and subsequently reinterred at a location that will be safe from future disturbances. Since the traditional cultural value of the cremation remains has thus been preserved, CRM TECH concludes that the project has had no substantial adverse effect on this "historical resource." CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS In conclusion, the earth -moving operations monitored during this study encountered a possible human cremation within the established boundaries of Site 33-001769. While the portion of the site within the project area, in general, does not constitute a "historical resource," the cremation feature does, individually, because of its traditional cultural value to the local Native American community. The current project, however, did not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of the cremation remains. An isolate that was also discovered during this study, by definition, does not require formal evaluation as a potential "historical resource," and requires no further consideration. In light of the results and findings of the monitoring program, CRM TECH presents the following recommendations to the City of La Quinta: The earth -moving operations monitored during this study have not had a substantial adverse effect on any "historical resources," as defined by CEQA. The project was carried out in compliance with CEQA provisions on cultural resources and with the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance, and no further archaeological investigations will be necessary within the project area. 10 REFERENCES Apple, Steven A. 1980 An Archaeological Assessment of the Bermuda Dunes Property, Tract 13986, - Indio, Riverside County, California. On file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Brock, James, and Brenda D. Smith 2000 Phase I and Phase II Archaeological Assessments for the Proposed. Monticello Project, West Side of Jefferson Street between Fred Waring Drive and Miles Avenue, La Quinta, California. On file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Brown, M.A. 1979 Cultural Resource Assessment for the Desert Palace Project, Tentative Tract 13986, near Indio, Riverside County, California. On file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Campbell, Paul D. 1999 Survival Skirls of Dative California. Gibbs Smith Publisher, Salt Lake City. Desautels, ? 1982 California Historical Resources Inventory site record update, 33-0017691 CA-RIV- 1769. On file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, -Riverside. 11 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 1 of 18 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (“City”), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site Development Permit, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Site Development Permit 2018-0001 shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation measures for the following related approval(s): Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 Specific Plan 2018-0001 Tentative Parcel Map 36241 Site Development Permit 2007-898 In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of these approvals, the Director of Design and Development shall adjudicate the conflict by determining the precedence. 3. The Site Development Permit shall expire two years from City Council approval and shall become null and void in accordance with La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.200.080, unless a building permit has been issued. A time extension may be requested per LQMC Section 9.200.080. 4. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies, if required: x Riverside County Fire Marshal x La Quinta Development Division (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works Clearance) for Building Permits, Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) Exemption Form – Whitewater River Region, Improvement Permit) x La Quinta Planning Division x Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department x Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 2 of 18 x Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) x Imperial Irrigation District (IID) x California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) x State Water Resources Control Board x SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) x South Coast Air Quality Management District Coachella Valley (SCAQMD) The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When these requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. 5. Coverage under the State of California Construction General Permit must be obtained by the applicant; who then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s (“RWQCB”) acknowledgment of the applicant’s Notice of Intent (“NOI”) and Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number to the City prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City’s NPDES stormwater discharge permit, LQMC Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; the California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Colorado River Basin Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011 and the State Water Resources Control Board’s Order No. 2012-0006-DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (“SWPPP”) to the State Water Resources Control Board. The applicant or design professional can obtain the California Stormwater Quality Association SWPPP template at www.cabmphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation. B. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 3 of 18 inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. C. The applicant’s SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practices (“BMPs”) (LQMC Section 8.70.020 (Definitions)): 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non-Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. D. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading, pursuant to this project. E. The SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. 7. Developer shall reimburse the City, within thirty (30) days of presentment of the invoice, all costs and actual attorney’s fees incurred by the City Attorney to review, negotiate and/or modify any documents or instruments required by these conditions, if Developer requests that the City modify or revise any documents or instruments prepared initially by the City to effect these conditions. This obligation shall be paid in the time noted above without deduction or offset and Developer’s failure to make such payment shall be a material breach of the Conditions of Approval. 8. Developer shall reimburse the City, within thirty (30) days of presentment of the invoice, all costs and actual consultant’s fees incurred by the City for engineering and/or surveying consultants to review and/or modify any documents or instruments required by this project. This obligation shall be paid in the time noted above without deduction or offset and Developer’s failure to make such payment shall be a material breach of the Conditions of Approval. PROPERTY RIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 4 of 18 9. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 10. Pursuant to the aforementioned condition, conferred rights shall include approvals from the master developer or the Owners Association over easements and other property rights necessary for construction and proper functioning of the proposed development not limited to access rights over proposed and/or existing parking lot that access public streets and open space/drainage facilities of the master development. Said rights shall also include dedication of a new easement to the City for the relocation of the underground fire department equipment that crosses through multiple parcels. The existing water and access easement for the underground fire department equipment shall be quitclaimed. 11. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS 12. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 and in particular the following: A. The parking spaces and aisle widths and the double hairpin stripe parking space design shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150. B. Cross slopes should be a maximum of 2% where accessibility is required including accessibility routes between buildings. C. Building access points shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plans so that accessibility issues can be evaluated. D. Accessibility routes to public streets and adjacent development shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plan. E. Parking space lengths shall be according to LQMC Chapter 9.150 and be a minimum of 18 feet in length with a 2-foot overhang for PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 5 of 18 all parking spaces or as approved by the City Engineer. One van accessible parking space is required per 6 accessible parking spaces. F. Drive aisles between parking spaces shall be a minimum of 26 feet with access drive aisles to Public Streets a minimum of 30 feet or as approved by the City Engineer. A minimum of 20 feet on each side of approach drives shall be provided where divided by median islands and as approved by the City Engineer. 13. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site-specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Parking Lot & Aisles (Low Traffic) 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. Parking Lot & Aisles (High Traffic) 4.5” a.c./5.5” c.a.b. Loading Areas 6” P.C.C./4” c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 14. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 15. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks. 16. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 6 of 18 IMPROVEMENT PLANS 17. As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as “engineer,” “surveyor,” and “architect,” refers to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 18. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans). 19. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Design and Development Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. PM10 Plan 1” = 40’ Horizontal B. Erosion Control Plan 1” = 40’ Horizontal C. Final WQMP (Plan submitted in Report Form) D. On-Site Commercial Precise Grading 1" = 20' Horizontal NOTE: A through D to be submitted concurrently. (Separate Storm Drain Plans if applicable) Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. “On-Site Commercial Precise Grading” plan is required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official, Planning Manager and the City Engineer. “On-Site Commercial Precise Grading” plans shall normally include all on- site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 7 of 18 improvements and accessibility requirements. 20. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the Public Works Development “Plans, Notes and Design Guidance” section of the City website (www.laquintaca.gov). Please navigate to the Design and Development Department home page and look for the Standard Drawings hyperlink. 21. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the mylars of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. 22. Upon completion of construction, and prior to final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all approved mylars previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as-built conditions. The applicant shall employ or retain the Engineer of Record during the construction phase of the project so that the EOR can make site visits in support of preparing "Record Drawing". However, if subsequent approved revisions have been approved by the City Engineer and reflect said "Record Drawing" conditions, the Engineer of Record may submit a letter attesting to said fact to the City Engineer in lieu of mylar submittal. GRADING 23. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements). 24. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. A. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: B. A grading plan prepared by a civil engineer registered in the State of California, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 8 of 18 C. A preliminary geotechnical (“soils”) report prepared by a professional registered in the State of California, D. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with LQMC Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), and E. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with LQMC Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls), and F. A WQMP prepared by an authorized professional registered in the State of California, and G. A grading bond in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the grading bond requirements. All grading shall conform with the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by soils engineer, or engineering geologist registered in the State of California. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions. Additionally, the applicant shall replenish said security if expended by the City of La Quinta to comply with the Plan as required by the City Engineer. 25. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 26. Building pad elevations on the precise grading plan submitted for City Engineer’s approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the Site Development Permit Preliminary Grading Plans, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 27. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus five tenths of a foot (0.5’) from PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 9 of 18 the elevations shown on the Site Development Permit Preliminary Grading Plans, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 28. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor with applicable compaction tests and over excavation documentation. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. DRAINAGE 29. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for Jefferson Square, SDP 2018-0001, or as approved by the City Engineer. 30. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), Retention Basin Design Criteria, Engineering Bulletin No. 06- 16 – Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. More specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100-year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The design storm shall be either the 1-hour, 3-hour, 6-hour or 24-hour event producing the greatest total run off. 31. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be disposed of per approved methods contained in Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 – Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. 32. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise and as approved by the City Engineer. 33. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 10 of 18 approved by the Planning Manager and the City Engineer. 34. For on-site above ground common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 – Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems. Side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. Additionally, retention basin widths shall be not less than 20 feet at the bottom of the basin or as approved by the City Engineer. 35. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to LQMC Section 9.100.040(B)(7). 36. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. 37. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions for post construction runoff per the City’s NPDES stormwater discharge permit, LQMC Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011. A. For post-construction urban runoff from New Development and Redevelopments Projects, the applicant shall implement requirements of the NPDES permit for the design, construction and perpetual operation and maintenance of BMPs per the approved Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the project as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013- 0011. B. The applicant shall implement the WQMP Design Standards per (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011 utilizing BMPs approved by the City Engineer. A project specific WQMP shall be provided which incorporates Site Design and Treatment BMPs utilizing first flush infiltration as a preferred method of NPDES Permit Compliance for Whitewater River receiving water, as PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 11 of 18 applicable. C. The developer shall execute and record a Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Agreement that provides for the perpetual maintenance and operation of all post-construction stormwater BMPs. UTILITIES 38. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110 (Utilities). 39. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above-ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 40. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. Additionally, grease traps and the maintenance thereof shall be located as to not conflict with access aisles/entrances. CONSTRUCTION 41. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have parking lot improvements and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly-maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION 42. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans). 43. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, and common lots. Said landscaping shall be constantly maintained by the center owner with damaged, dead or dying plant material immediately replaced with healthy plant material of equivalent size. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 12 of 18 44. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 45. All new and modified landscape areas shall have landscaping and permanent irrigation improvements in compliance with the City’s Water Efficient Landscape regulations contained in LQMC Section 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscape). 46. Lighting plans shall be submitted with the final landscaping plans for a recommendation to the Planning Manager for his approval. Exterior lighting shall be consistent with LQMC Section 9.100.150 (Outdoor Lighting). All freestanding lighting shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and shall be fitted with a visor if deemed necessary by staff to minimize trespass of light off the property. The illuminated carports shall be included in the photometric study as part of the final lighting plan submittal. 47. All water features shall be designed to minimize “splash”, and use high efficiency pumps and lighting to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. They shall be included in the landscape plan water efficiency calculations per Municipal Code Chapter 8.13. 48. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be completely screened from view. Utility transformers or other ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be fully screened with a screening wall or landscaping and painted to match the adjacent buildings. 49. The applicant shall submit the final landscape plans for review, processing and approval to the Design and Development Department, in accordance with the Final Landscape Plan application process. Planning Manager approval of the final landscape plans is required prior to issuance of the first building permit unless the Planning Manager determines extenuating circumstances exist which justifies an alternative processing schedule. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the appropriate City official, including the Planning Manager and/or City Engineer. 50. The applicant or his agent has the responsibility for proper sight distance requirements per guidelines in the AASHTO “A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 5th Edition” or latest, in the design PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 13 of 18 and/or installation of all landscaping and appurtenances abutting and within the private and public street right-of-way. MAINTENANCE 51. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance). 52. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on-site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, sidewalks, and stormwater BMPs. FEES AND DEPOSITS 53. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits). These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. 54. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Development Impact Fee and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee programs in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). FIRE DEPARTMENT 55. All proposed gates shall be equipped approved KNOX key switch for emergency response with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox Company. Building plans shall include mounting location/position and operating standards for Fire Department approval. Electric gate openers shall be listed in accordance with UL 325. Gates intended for automatic operation shall be designed and constructed per ASTM F2200. 56. Prior to building plan approval and construction, applicant/developer shall furnish two copies of the water system fire hydrant plans to Fire Department for review and approval. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, and shall confirm hydrant type, location, spacing, and minimum fire flow. Once plans are signed and approved by the local water authority, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Department for review and approval. 57. Prior to issuance of building permits, the water system for fire protection PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 14 of 18 must be provided as approved by the Fire Department and the local water authority. 58. Blue dot retro-reflector pavement markers shall be located on private streets, public streets and driveways to indicate location of the fire hydrant per standard number 06-05 (located at www.rvcfire.org).- 59. Fire Apparatus access road shall be in compliance with the Riverside County Fire Department Standards. Access lanes will not have an up, or downgrade of more than 16%. Access roads shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance not less than 13 feet and 6 inches. Access lanes will be designed to withstand the weight of 75 thousand pounds over 2 axles. Access will have a turning radius capable of accommodating fire apparatus. Access lane shall be constructed with a surface so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. 60. Display street numbers in a prominent location on the address side of building(s) and/or rear access if applicable. Numbers and letters shall be a minimum of 12” in height for building(s) up to 25’ in height. In complexes with alpha designations, letter size must match numbers. All addressing must be legible, of a contrasting color, and adequately illuminated to be visible from street at all hours. 61. Install a complete commercial fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler system(s) with pipe sizes in excess of 4” in diameter will require the project Structural Engineer to certify with a “wet signature”, that the structural system is designed to support the seismic and gravity loads to support the additional weight of the sprinkler system. All fire sprinkler risers shall be protected from any physical damage. 62. The PIV and FCD shall be located to the front of building within 50 feet of approved roadway and within 200 feet of an approved hydrant. Sprinkler riser room must have indicating exterior and/or interior door signs. A C- 16 licensed contractor must submit plans, along with current permit fees, to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to installation. 63. Install an alarm monitoring system for fire sprinkler system(s) with 6 or more heads in any one given fire area (limited area system), along with current permit fees, to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to installation. An automatic/manual fire alarm system with occupant notification in accordance with section 907 in the California Fire Code might be required based on occupancy and occupant load. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 15 of 18 64. Install a portable fire extinguisher, with a minimum rating of 2A-10BC, for every 3,000 sq. ft. and/or 75 feet of travel distance. Fire extinguishers shall be mounted 3.5 to 5 feet above finished floor, measured to the top of the extinguisher. Where not readily visible, signs shall be posted above all extinguishers to indicate their locations. Extinguishers must have current CSFM service tags affixed. 65. No hazardous materials shall be stored and/or used within the building, which exceeds quantities listed in 2013 CBC. No class I, II or IIIA of combustible/flammable liquid shall be used in any amount in the building. 66. Exit designs, exit signs, door hardware, exit markers, exit doors, and exit path marking shall be installed per the 2013 CBC. 67. Electrical room doors if applicable shall be posted “ELECTRICAL ROOM” on outside of door. 68. Fire Alarm Control Panel room doors if applicable shall be posted “FACP” on outside of door. 69. Fire Riser Sprinkler room doors if applicable shall be posted “Fire Riser” on outside of door. 70. Roof Access room door if applicable shall be posted “Roof Access” on outside of door. 71. Access shall be provided to all mechanical equipment located on the roof as required by the Mechanical Code. 72. Air handling systems supplying air in excess of 2000 cubic feet per minute to enclosed spaces within buildings shall be equipped with an automatic shutoff. 2013 CMC. 73. Nothing in the preliminary review shall be construed as encompassing structural integrity. Review of this plan does not authorize or approve any omission or deviation from all applicable regulations. Final approval is subject to plan review and field inspection. All questions regarding the meaning of the code requirements should be referred to Fire Department at 760-777-7074. 74. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provision for the turnaround capabilities of fire apparatus. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 16 of 18 75. Any portion of the facility or of an exterior wall of the first story of the building shall not be located more than 150 feet from fire apparatus access roads as measured by an approved route around the complex, exterior of the facility or building. 76. Driveway loops, fire apparatus access lanes and entrance curb radius should be designed to adequately allow access of emergency fire vehicles. The applicant or developer shall include in the building plans the required fire lanes and include the appropriate lane printing and/or signs. 77. No combustible material/construction is to occur without proper installation of an approved reliable water supply for firefighting operations. A stop work order shall be issued in such circumstances. BUILDING DIVISION 78. Building Plans prepared for permitting shall meet applicable California Building Codes effective at the time of submittal. MISCELLANEOUS 79. The hotel structure shall incorporate solar panels in order to support alternative energy usage as referenced in the Specific Plan. 80. Representatives from tribes within the project vicinity commented and have requested the following considerations: A. The presence of an approved Native American Cultural Resource Monitor(s) shall be onsite during any ground disturbing activities (including archaeological testing and surveys). B. Should buried cultural deposits be encountered, the Monitor may request that destructive construction halt and the Monitor shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines) to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Agua Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation Office. 81. The County Coroner shall be contacted if human remains are identified during earthmoving activities. If the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be contacted. The NAHC will make a determination of the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). The City and the landowner will work PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 17 of 18 with the designated MLD to determine the final disposition of the remains. 82. No signage is permitted with this approval. A separate permit from the Design and Development Department is required for any temporary or permanent signs. 83. Any outdoor lighting that is installed shall be hooded or shielded so as to prevent either the spillage of lumens or reflection into the sky. 84. The following uses/activities shall be prohibited at this site: A. Any use or activity which would direct a steady light or flashing light of red, white, green or amber colors associated with airport operations toward an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or toward an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach toward a landing at an airport, other than an FAA- approved navigational signal light or visual approach slope indicator. B. Any use or activity which would cause sunlight to be reflected towards an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or towards an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach towards a landing at an airport. C. Any use or activity which would generate smoke or water vapor or which would attract large concentrations of birds, or which may otherwise affect safe air navigation in the area. Such uses include landscaping utilizing water features, aquaculture, composting operations, production of cereal grains, sunflower, and row crops, trash transfer stations that are open on one or more sides, recycling centers containing putrescible wastes, construction and demolition debris facilities, fly ash disposal and incinerators. D. Any use which would generate electrical interference that may be detrimental to the operation of aircraft and/or aircraft instrumentation. 85. Any new detention basin(s) on the site shall be designed to provide for a maximum 48-hour detention period following the conclusion of the storm event for the design storm (may be less, but not more), and to remain totally dry between rainfalls. Vegetation in and around the detention basin(s) that would provide food or cover for bird species that would be PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 18 of 18 incompatible with airport operations shall not be utilized in project landscaping. 86. The landscape architect shall identify standards for planting, irrigation and maintenance in the final landscape plan and the standards shall be included in Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) which shall be recorded on the Property and shall be reviewed and approved by the City. 87. Applicant shall record Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) on the Property. The CC&Rs shall (1) require minimum covenants for satisfactory, perpetual maintenance obligations on the Property; (2) name the City of La Quinta as an express third party beneficiary; (3) be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation; and (4) state that the CC&Rs cannot be amended without prior written consent of the City. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL – RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2018-0001 (SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-062, AMENDMENT 3) JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 1 OF 2 SPECIFIC PLAN 2018-0001 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (“City”), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Specific Plan. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Specific Plan 2018-0001 shall be developed in compliance with these conditions, and the approved Specific Plan document. In the event of any conflicts between these conditions and the provisions of Specific Plan 2018- 0001, these conditions shall take precedence. 3. Specific Plan 2018-0001 shall comply with all applicable terms, conditions and/or mitigation measures for the following related approvals: Environmental Assessment 2018-0001 Site Development Permit 2018-0001 In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of these approvals, the Design and Development Director shall adjudicate the conflict by determining the precedence. 4. Within 30 days of City Council approval, applicant shall provide an electronic copy (.pdf) and three bound paper copies of the Final Specific Plan document to the Design and Development Department. The Final Specific Plan shall include all text and graphics, all amendments per this action, and correction of any typographical errors, internal document inconsistencies, and other amendments deemed necessary by the Planning Manager. 5. The hotel structure shall incorporate solar panels in order to support alternative energy usage as referenced in the Specific Plan. 6. Representatives from tribes within the project vicinity commented and have requested the following considerations: A. The presence of an approved Native American Cultural Resource Monitor(s) shall be onsite during any ground disturbing activities (including archaeological testing and surveys). PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2018- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL – RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2018-0001 (SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-062, AMENDMENT 3) JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL AND MARKET ADOPTED: Page 2 OF 2 B. Should buried cultural deposits be encountered, the Monitor may request that destructive construction halt and the Monitor shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines) to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Agua Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation Office. Project Information CASE NUMBER:SPECIFIC PLAN 2018-0001 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018-0001 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2018-0001 APPLICANT:CCD HOTEL AND RESORTS, LLC PROPERTY OWNER:REGENCY MARINITA LA QUINTA REQUEST:ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE JEFFERSON SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN (SP 2002-062), AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2018- 0001 TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 160- ROOM HOTEL, 8,849 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND 25,778 SQUARE FOOT INDOOR FOOD MARKET IN THE EXISTING JEFFERSON SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER AND RECOMMEND CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. LOCATION:SOUTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE APN: 604-521-010, 604-521-012, 604-521-013 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATION:NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USES:NORTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESPLANADE COMMUNITY SOUTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MONTICELLO COMMUNITY EAST: SHOPPING CENTER IN THE CITY OF INDIO, HERITAGE PALMS COMMUNITY WEST: PARK, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MONTICELLO PARK AND COMMUNITY ATTACHMENT 1 Site Photos View of site from Jefferson Street, facing west View of vacant pad and former Fresh and Easy building ATTACHMENT 2 Site Photos View of southern boundary of site, facing south toward Monticello community View of southwest corner of site, facing southwest toward Monticello community Site Photos View of existing shops to the north, within the Jefferson Square shopping center View of current northwestern access of the site from Fred Waring Drive Site Photos View of access to Monticello Park at northwest portion of shopping center View to the east toward Heritage Palms shopping center in Indio JEFFERSON SQUARE PARTI Amended Specific Plan City of La Quinta 12th September 2018 Applicant: CCD Hotel & Resort Design Team: PARTI DRC Engineering, Inc Terra Nova Planning & Research Inc $77$&+0(17 JEFFERSON SQUARE Amended Specific Plan City of La Quinta 12th September 2018 006-017 018-029 030-049 050-053 054-087 088-091 CONTENTS INTRO PROJECT SETTING PROJECT MASTER PLANS DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS DESIGN GUIDELINES OPERATIONAL GUIDE LINES 01_Intro $PHQGHG6SHFLÀF3ODQ PARTI September 2018 01 INTRO 006 -007INTRO Introduction A. AUTHORITY AND SCOPE Section 65450 of the California Government Code grants local agencies the authority to prepare a specific plan of development over a given piece of property. Consistent with this authority and in accordance with La Quinta General Plan, General land use Policy 4, the city is requiring that a Specific Plan be prepared for the proposed commercial center. In order to approve the project, the City must make the findings required by La Quinta Zoning Code, Chapter 9.240: Specific Plans. B PURPOSE AND INTENT The purpose of this Specific Plan document is to address the land use issues associated with development of Jefferson Square in sufficient detail to ensure that the subject site develops in a manner which is consistent with the General Plan; protects the public health, safety and general welfare; is compatible with zoning on adjacent properties and is suitable and appropriate for the subject property ( Zoning Code 9.240.010.E). Ultimately the project seeks to provide the surrounding residential neighborhoods with a high quality and convenient commercial/retail and hospitality center. In both text and illustration, this document depicts the character and configuration of the various components comprising the Specific Plan and establishes a foundation document that will govern further development of the site. In this way, the Specific Plan will serve to implement the City of La Quinta General Plan by specifying appropriate land uses, intensity of use, and development standards which are consistent with General Plan goals, objectives and policies. The specific plan is a flexible document, which allows minor modifications to accommodate minor changes to floor areas or tenant uses Minor modifications to the specific plan are within the Community Development Director’ s power to approve, and do not require further consideration at public hearings. C. DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION The Jefferson Square Specific Plan is organized into six sections. Section I provides a regulatory context for the project and an overview of key project elements. Section II, provides a context for project planning and design by briefly describing the project’s existing setting in terms of regulatory land use designations and surrounding land uses. Against this background, Section III presents the primary master plan components of the Specific Plan. Section IV describes the development standards to which the project must adhere. Section V contains design guidelines with respect to landscaping and architecture to ensure that the project is of a high quality and is well integrated into the community character, and Section VI discusses key operational guidelines for the project The majority of the document remains as approved as the Amended Specific Plan, No 2. New proposed amendments to the Amended Specific Plan No.3 are shown in red bold italic print. Bold italic prints refer to the amendments made to the Amended Specific Plan No. 2. New figures are provided as necessary to illustrate the current design. Strike- though text are no longer relevant to the specific plan No.3. D. PROJECT LOCATION From a regional perspective, the Jefferson Square Specific Plan is located in the Coachella Valley within the incorporated City of La Quinta as shown in Figure 1, Regional Location Map. Locally, the project site is bounded by Fred Waring Drive and a residential development on the north; residential along the west; and single family residential exists along the southern periphery of the site. As shown in Figure 2, Vicinity Map, the project area consists of a rectangular 10.79 acre parcel of land, containing Assessor Parcel 604- 521- 004. The existing site conditions consist primarily of sandy soil sloping to the east at an approximate 1% grade. There are no unique physical or topographic features on site or in the immediate area. East of Jefferson Street recently completed a retail centre within the City of Indio. The current Specific Plan area is divided into 7 distinct land parcels comprising 10.27 acres in total (as shown in Figure 3). Within the 7 land parcels 4 of 7 has been developed (Figure 4). 008 -009INTRO The following existing parcel contains: Parcel 1 (1.467 acres) CVS Pharmacy with drive-thru and associated parking Parcel 2 (0.813 acres) 3 commercial/retail units and associated parking Parcel 3 (1.859 acres) Former Fresh & Easy retail store and associated parking Parcel 4 (0.575 acres) Undeveloped Parcel 5 (0.451 acres) 3 commercial/retail units and associated parking Parcel 6 (4.088 acres) Undeveloped Parcel 7 (1.013 acres) Undeveloped w r, RUM* wm DESERT HOT 1 } .3 'L fir' PALM "NGS cd -_ � cuePALM WERT be , CCACHELLA F i MOM b Fll[[cfta Regional 4LJciall Map WASSOCIAT w�rr � r aw Yti. � �FGI79F M} 1'I4.Jt�•y� I�/-y VSCAIE 011010 -INTRO Existing Parcels on Jefferson Square Parcel Map No. 36241 (Jan, 2010) Not to scale FIGURE NO. 3 N 012 - Jefferson Square & Surrounding Context Jeff e r s o n S t r e e t Fr e d W a r i n g D r i v e Parcel 1 Parcel 4 Parcel 3 Parcel 5 Parcel 7 Parcel 2 Parcel 6 N 013INTRO FIGURE NO. 4 E. PROJECT OVERVIEW Project Summary: The project proposes development of a neighborhood commercial/retail center on an approximate 10.79 acre site. The project will result in creation a single site area. Future submittal may be made to create individual parcels, but that subdivision is not requested at this time. The development will include the following uses: .Market .Drug Store .Retail/service shops .Bank .Restaurant .Hotel In addition to the proposed buildings, the project will include associated parking, street improvements, pedestrian sidewalks, landscaping, an above ground retention basins as well as underground retention facilities and utilities. The existing above ground retention basin adjacent to Monticello Park (west) will be converted to an underground retain basin. For the most part, the Specific Plan will be consistent with the allowable uses and development standards of the site’s neighborhood commercial general plan and zoning designations. The adoption of the Specific Plan would allow drive-thru windows at the proposed drug store and bank building. A reduction in landscape setbacks from the City’s standard of 15 feet to 5 feet 1 foot minimum along the project’s western boundary is also being pursued (refer to Figure 5 10). The Specific Plan would provide a total of 362 361 parking spaces on site, meeting Parking Standards of the Zoning Ordinance, and would implement a reciprocal parking agreement among all uses on site which will be made part of the conditions of the Building Management Association. A comparison of the Site Plan with development standards from the La Quinta Zoning Code is shown in Table 1 Site Plan Compliance. Requested Entitlements: To facilitate this project, the developer is seeking the City of La Quinta’ s approval of an amended Specific Plan, and a Site Development Permit to develop the Specific Plan area. The existing parcels 3 & 5 will be reintroduced as a year-round, indoor organic food and beverage market (with dine in facilities). The undeveloped parcel 6 will be commercial retail units to lease, and a hotel with 160 Guest rooms and public restaurant. Introduction 014 -015INTRO Min -Max Bldg Site (acres) Max Structure Height (ft) Max Structure Height (ft) 150 feet from Arterial Hwy. Max Number of Stories Max Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Min Building Setback - Primary linage Corridor (ft) Min Building Setback from OS and Park District (ft) Min Building Setback from residential Districts (ft) Min Landscape Setback Primary Image Corrdior (ft) Min Landscape Setback from OS and Park District (ft) Min Landscape Setback from Residential Districts (ft) Min Setback from interior propery line Building Landscape Interior Parking Lot Landscape Parking Spaces (1 space per 250 300 sq. ft.) . Not including architectural appendages, such as a root parapet or tower, up to 41 feet. . Not including up to 10% of the building mass, which will extend up to 36 feet. . Building size may be slightly reduced or enlarged during final design. However, the maximum FAR of 0.25 0.30 will not be exceeded for the entire site, or at any individual lot. . The development standard is 30 feet; however, the current site plan setback is 33 feet 31 feet.  The project’s western property line along Monticello Park averages 11 feet, with a minimum of 7.5 feet and maximum of 24.7 feet. The development standard is for 5 feet minimum; however the current site plan minimum setback is 7.5 feet 1 feet. 6. Current parking lot total on the Jefferson Square site is 364 7. Updated parking requirements request a total of 358 parking lots. The proposed site plan will provide a total of 361 parking lots. 'HYHORSPHQW6WDQGDUG 7DEOH6LWH3ODQ&RPSOLDQFH &1=RQH 6SHFLILF 3ODQ 1-20 35 22 2 0.25 30 30 30 20 15 15 0 5% 5% 362 358 (6) 10.79 35(1) 22(2) 1 3 0.25 0.30(3) 30 30(4) 31(4) 30 61 20 5(5) 1(5) 15 0 5% 5% 362 358 (7) F. REQUIRED FINDINGS According to the La Quinta Zoning Code, Chapter 9.240.010.E, the City Council must make four specific findings in order to approve the project. Each finding is listed below followed by a discussion of how each is satisfied by this project. The project’s success in meeting the required findings is supported by the facts presented throughout the Specific Plan document. 1.Consistency with the General Plan. The plan or amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan. -The project proposes development of a commercial/retail center that will serve the surrounding neighborhoods, which is consistent with the allowable uses under the site’s Neighborhood Commercial (NC) General Plan Land use designation. The project also proposes hotel uses which are not allowed under the Neighborhood Commercial Zone but are allowed in the General Commercial (GC) General Plan designation. The proposed hotel uses can be accommodated through this Specific Plan. 2. Public Welfare. Approval of the plan or amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare. -The site plan for this project is consistent with City development standards which are established to protect the public health and safety. -In accordance with the City’s General Plan, the proposed commercial development is consistent with the sites NC land use designation, which envisions commercial land uses such as: food and drug stores; personal services; small restaurants; and financial institutions, Retail units and recreational facilities operated by the hotel, which will serve the daily needs of adjacent neighborhoods. 3. Land Use Compatibility. The specific plan is compatible with zoning on adjacent properties. -The subject property is general planned and zoned Neighborhood Commercial. The commercial property is physically separated and buffered from planned residential uses along the north by intervening roadways and landscape/ sidewalk easements. Residential development to the west is buffered from the site by an existing 6’ high block wall, a city park, well-site, and retention basin. An existing 6’ high block wall located atop a 2’ berm, separates the site and existing residential to the south, as shown in Figure 5. -The Specific Plan would be compatible with planned land use on the City of Indio property to the east. The parcel of land immediately east of the site and Jefferson Street has been developed for commercial use and lies within the City of Indio. -Hours of operation will be consistent with adjacent land uses. -The proposed uses will not generate excessive noise or other nuisances. -The proposed hotel’s hours of operation will extend beyond commercial/retail operating hours and will be host to recreational events that may extend into the evening. The effect of this noise to the neighbouring sites will be mitigated by the position of events spaces away from the south of the subject site. 4. Property Suitability: The specific plan is suitable and appropriate for the subject properly. -Consistent with the NC CN land use designation for the site, the Specific Plan area is appropriately located at the intersection of two primary and major arterial roadways. Also nearby is the I-10 highway interchange onto Jefferson Street. -The project is being proposed in a location that will allow convenient access to commercial and retail uses by the surrounding residential communities, and access to the hotel. -The site will require minimal grading, and all utilities are readily available, and can be routinely extended to serve the proposed uses. -The site plan complies with City development standards, and implements General Plan Goals and Policies. Introduction 016 - Existing dense landscape buffer against residential zone to south of site Monticello Park (PR zone) serves as a valuable community asset to the west of the site: The project will use the existing connect between Monticello park and Jefferson Square. 017INTRO FIGURE NO. 5 02_Project setting $PHQGHG6SHFLÀF3ODQ PARTI September 2018 018 -019PROJECT SETTING 02 PROJECT SETTING Project Setting A. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING The 10.79 acre project site located at the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street is designated as Neighborhood Commercial (NC) in the City’s General Plan. As stated in Table 2.1 of the City’s General Plan, the NC land use designation supports: “The development of commercial land uses which serve the daily needs of the adjacent neighborhood on parcels of 10 to 20 acres. Typical land uses include food and drug stores, personal services, small restaurants, and financial institutions. This designation generally occurs at arterial and major arterial Consistent with the City’ s General Plan designation, the subject property is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (CN). The City of La Quinta Zoning Code, Section 9.70.060 states that the purpose and intent of the CN Zone is: “To provide for the development and regulation of small-scale commercial areas located at the intersections of arterial highways as shown on the General Plan. The CN district is intended to provide for the sale of food, drugs, sundries, and personal services to meet the daily needs of a neighborhood area.“ Existing General Plan and zoning designations for the site and surrounding properties are shown in Figure 3 6 Existing Land Use Designations. The Jefferson Square Specific Plan would result in development of commercial and service oriented land uses on an approximate 10.79 acre site located at the intersection of two major arterial roadways, which is consistent with the city’ s existing General Plan and zoning designations for the site. The intent of the Jefferson Square Specific Plan is to establish a site plan, design standards, and specific allowable land uses that will facilitate development of a commercial/retail/hotel center that will cater to the surrounding residential neighborhoods, and complement the City and surrounding community through the use of decorative architectural and landscaping themes. CIRCULATION ELEMENT The Jefferson Square Specific Plan area is bordered by Fred Waring Drive on the north, and Jefferson Street on the east. The City’ s General Plan designates Fred Waring Drive as a Primary Arterial, and Jefferson Street as a Major Arterial. Both roadways are also designated as Primary Image Corridors in the General Plan. The development of the property is consistent with policies and programs outlined in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Policy 4: “Encourage expansion of ridership and the service area of the public transit systems operated by the Sunline Transit Authority within the City.“ Policy CIR-2.1: “Encourage and cooperate with SunLine Transit Agency on the expansion of routes, facilities, services and ridership especially in congested areas and those with high levels of employment and commercial services, and encourage the use of most energy efficient and least polluting transportation technologies” The project includes the provision for a bus stop on Jefferson Street. The project will identify a Transportation Demand Coordinator in accordance with City Ordinance (Section 9.180.030), who will be responsible for coordinating ride sharing, bus ridership, flexible work schedules, and other Transportation Demand Management program among employees. Policy 6: “Develop and encourage the use of continuous and convenient bicycle routes and multi -use trails to places of employment, recreation, shopping, schools, and other high activity areas with potential for increased bicycle, equestrian, golf cart and other non -vehicular use.“ Policy CIR-1.12: “As a means of reducing vehicular traffic on major roadways and to reduce vehicle miles travelled by traffic originated in the City, the City shall pursue development of land use pattern that maximizes interactions between adjacent or near by land uses” Policy CIR-2.3: “Develop and encourage the use of continuous and convenient pedestrain and bicycle route and multi- use path to place of employment, recreation, shopping schools and other high activity areas with potential for increased pedestrain, bicycle, golf car/NEV modes of travel.” 020 -021PROJECT SETTING GC General commercial GC FIGURE NO. 6 The project will includes development of meandering pedestrian sidewalks and “on road” bicycle lanes fronting the development along Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. A functional network of internal pedestrian walkways and bicycle racks will also be provided on site. The hotel will provide rental bicycles to encourage hotel guest not to use automobiles. OPEN SPACE ELEMENT The site has not been defined in the General Plan as an area that includes outstanding and significant natural or manmade features, there are no steep topographical or geotechnical constrains, nor does the site fall under any of the criteria for Open Space designation. Thus, development of the site is not in conflict with any of the City’s Open Space policies, goals and programs. The hotel’s central courtyard will be open to the public during operational hours and will use the existing pedestrian connection to Monticello Park. PARK AND RECREATION ELEMENT The site is not identified in the General Plan as an existing or proposed city park and/or recreational facility. Development of the Specific Plan area would not result in an increase in population generating a need for additional parkland or recreational facilities. The City’s General Plan identifies Monticello Park as being located immediately adjacent to the site’s western boundary. The project will include the development of pedestrian sidewalks and “on road” bicycle lanes along Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, which would facilitate pedestrian movement between the site and the adjacent parkland. A functional network of internal pedestrian walkways and bicycle racks will also be provided on site. Thus, development of the site is not in conflict with any of the City’s Parks and Recreation policies, goals and programs. NATURAL RESOURCES ELEMENT Development of the site will not degrade any aspects of the natural and man-made environment which are of aesthetic, environmental or cultural value to the City. Development of the Jefferson Square Amended Specific Plan No.3 will be consistent with many of the policies and programs outlined in the Natural Resources Element of the General Plan. Air Quality Policies- Policy 2: “The City shall strive to maintain a balance between housing and commercial and industrial growth within the community to reduce the length of commuter trips.“ Policy AQ-1.2: “Work to reduce emissions from residential and commercial energy use by encouraging decreased consumption and increased efficiency” The project will result in the development of a neighborhood commercial/retail center on site, which would provide the local community with a convenient location for buying goods/services, which they would otherwise have to travel out of the area to obtain. The year-round organic food market will also serve as a useful resource for residents of La Quinta. Policy 4: “The city shall encourage growth around activity centers and arterial streets to provide more efficient travels patterns and transit service.” Policy AQ-1.5: “Ensure all construction activities minimize emissions of all air quality pollutants. The prefabricated building elements will reduce the amount of noise and air pollution during construction. Policy 5: “The City shall promote the development of alternative modes of transportation to reduce motor vehicle emissions.“ Policy AQ-1.3: “Work to reduce emissions from mobile sources by encouraging a decrease in the number of vehicle trips and vehicle miles travelled” Project Setting 022 - The Jefferson Square Specific Plan would be developed at the intersection of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, which are designated as Primary and Major Arterials in the General Plan. The project will provide alternative transportation amenities including; a bus stop along Jefferson Street, and “on road” bicycle lanes and pedestrian sidewalks fronting Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. The existing site infrastructure includes alternative transportation amenities including; a bus stop along Jefferson Street, and “on road” bicycle lanes and pedestrian sidewalks fronting Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street (both primary and major arterial roads in the General Plan). The recently opened I-10 interchange will also bring more traffic around the site. Energy and Mineral Resource Policies- Policy 1: “The City shall encourage the incorporation of energy conservation features in the design of all new construction and the installation of energy-saving devices in existing development.” Policy EM-1.2: “Support the use of alternative energy and conversation of traditional energy sources to alternative energy.” The proposed project shall comply with the City’s energy conservation plans as identified in the City’s General Plan. The City shall review all project related design and building plans to ensure compliance with energy saving techniques and policies, including compliance with Title 24 building standards of the California Administrative Code 1604(f). The hotel proposal will provide solar panels to support the use of alternative energy usage. Biological Resource Policies- Policy 1: “The City shall continue to participate in regional efforts to protect wildlife habitat, including suitable habitat for rare and endangered species.“ Policy 2: “Staff shall review all development applications for vacant land for their potential impacts to existing wildlife and habitat.“ Policy 3: “Native, drought -tolerant desert plant materials shall be incorporated into the new development to the greatest extent practical. Invasive, non-native species shall be discouraged.“ Policy BIO-1.2: “Where appropriate, site -specific, species-specific surveys shall be required for the seven species mp covered by the MSHCP” Policy BIO-1.6: “Native desert plant materials should be incorporated into new development projects to the greatest extent possible. Invasive, non native species shall be discouraged” Prior to the mass grading activities, the project site was intensively surveyed by a qualified biologist for the presence of sensitive biological resources. The associated survey concluded that there were no sensitive biological resources within the site. The City’s required design and environmental review and conditioning process will ensure that the project does not adversely affect any identified sensitive species. The project’s proposed landscaping palette incorporates the use of native drought -tolerant plants (see Landscape Guidelines below). 023PROJECT SETTING The view from western hotel bedrooms over Monticello Park Palaeontological Resource Policies. Policy 1: “The City shall require the preparation of paleontologic resource analyses by a qualified paleontologist for all development proposals which occur in areas of High Sensitivity.“ Policy CUL-1.1: “All reasonable efforts should made to identify archaeological and historical resources in the City.“ According to Exhibit 6.8 of the City’s General Plan, the project site is located within an area of “low” paleontologic sensitivity, and therefore would require no further studies or conflict with any relevant General Plan policies and programs. WATER RESOURCE POLICIES- Policy 1: “The City shall support the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) in its efforts to supply adequate domestic water to residents and businesses.“ Policy WR-1.1: “Support the Coachella Valley Water District in its efforts to supply adequate domestic water to residents and businesses.“ Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall secure the necessary commitments from CVWD for the project’s domestic water needs. Policy 4: “The City shall ensure that surface water resources are protected.“ Policy 6: All development plans shall be reviewed for their potential to create surface and groundwater contamination hazards from point and non-point sources.“ Policy WR.-1.4: “Protect storm water from pollution and encourage its use to recharge the aquifer“ Policy WR-1.6: “Encourage the use of permeable pavement in residential and commercial development projects” In accordance with the Federal Clean Water Act, the project will be subject to the permit requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The construction contractor, in consultation with the lead agency, shall be responsible for filing all required notices with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), preparing the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and implementing required Best Management Practices (BMPs). The City’s required design and environmental review And conditioning process will ensure compliance with the City’s applicable stormwater drainage standards. INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES ELEMENTS Development of the site will not be in conflict with the policies and programs of the Infrastructure and Public Service Element. The necessary public utility infrastructure is readily available to the project site from the surrounding development, and the associated extensions are anticipated to be routine once construction begins. The project will incrementally increase the need for public services within the City, and therefore the developer will contribute the appropriate development fees to help fund the expansion of these services within the City. ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS ELEMENT The site is not identified in the Environmental Hazards Element as being located within an area that is susceptible to a significant risk from seismic, liquefaction or flood related hazards. Consistent with policy 5 of the Geologic and Seismic Hazards section, all structures on site will be built in accordance with the latest version of the California Building Code (CBC). The City’s standard protocols for tentative tract map review, conditioning and approval, will ensure compliance with the relevant goals, policies and programs of the Environmental Hazards Element. CULTURAL RESOURCE ELEMENT According to Exhibit 9.1 of the City’s General Plan, the project site does not contain any identified cultural or historic resources on site or in the immediate vicinity. Development of the property will be consistent with policies and programs outlined in the Cultural Resource Element of the General Plan. Project Setting 024 -025PROJECT SETTING Policy 1.2: “The City shall consider the identification of cultural resources as an integral part of the planning process.“ Policy 2.1: “The City shall make all reasonable effort to protect cultural resources under its regulatory control.“ Policy CUL-1.1: “All Reasonable efforts should be made to identify archaeological and historic resources in the City.“ Policy CUL-1.2: “Assure that significant identified archaeological and historic resources are protected.” Prior to the mass grading activities, the project site was intensively surveyed by a qualified archaeologist for the presence of cultural resources. The associated survey concluded that there were no archaeological resources within the site Construction specifications will be included, which require the contractor to immediately halt grading or any other construction activity, if a buried cultural resource artifact/site is accidentally uncovered during grading operations The specifications will require that the developer or contractor notify the City and summon a qualified specialist in order to determine the appropriate action for documenting and preserving a find. B. EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS Existing site conditions are shown in Figure 8 Existing Site Plan. Parcel 6 is vacant and contains sparse areas of desert scrub vegetation. The site has been mass graded and generally slopes to the east at an approximate 1% grade. Ground elevations on parcels 3 and 5 range from approximately 50 feet above sea level (asl) along the west to approximately 40 feet asl at the eastern boundary: existing building elevations reach up to 80 feet (asl). There are no unique physical or topographic features on site. Existing site conditions are shown in Figure 4. The subject property is vacant, and contains sparse areas of desert scrub vegetation. The site has recently been mass graded and generally slopes to the east at an approximate 1% grade. Elevations on site range from approximately 50 feet above sea level (asl) along the west to approximately 40 feet asl at the eastern boundary. There are no unique physical or topographic features on site. Off-site improvements include a traffic signal, and existing curb and gutter (with handicapped access) at the northeast corner of the site ( Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street intersection), and four electrical transmission line poles, which flank the northern periphery of the site. The site is also bordered by 6’ high masonry walls on the southern and western boundaries. Curb, gutter and deceleration lane improvements have been completed on Jefferson past the northern entry drive to the site. The former Fresh & Easy building (figure 7) has remained empty since construction, and the building requires renovation to reinstate essential HVAC systems and to function as a commercial property. The proposed re-purposing of the building into an organic food and beverage market will require modifications to the building’s fabric, without major structural changes to the existing foundations, walls or roof. The former Fresh & Easy building FIGURE NO. 7 JEFFERSON SQUARE EXISTING SITE PLAN JSQ-PARTI-FIGURE 08 A 38 15 5 Landscape Retention Area Adjacent Residences Shops 1 (Undeveloped) 190 Par c (Undev Monticello Park JSQ-AME LANDSCAPE PROVIDED: WITHIN PARKING: 13,971 SF (6.2%) PERIMETER & BUILDING AREAS: 25,185 SF (10.1%) RETENTION AREAS: 38,619 SF TOTAL: 77,775 SF (16.5 of total site area%) Notes: *The OSH retail (Parcel 6) store was never developed and has been empty for the past 12 years. During 2015 there was another proposal for a fitness centre but was never built ** Shop1, Pad A has been undeveloped for the past 12 years and in future will be developed by others. 90,441 SFTOTAL 362 362 4,500 SFPADS** 4.0/1,000SF 18 6,500 SFSHOPS** 4.0/1,000SF 4.0/1,000SF 4.0/1,000SF 4.0/1,000SF 66 13,013 SFDRUG CVS 52 13,928 SFFRESH & EASY 56 USE OSH* 2,500 SF 170 SQUARE FOOTAGE PARKING RATE REQUIRED PARKING (#STALLS) PROPOSED PARKING (#STALLS) TOTAL SITE AREA: 10.79 AC (470,060 SF) TOTAL BUILT SITE COVERAGE: 29.82% Landscape Retention Area 4 12 16 6 11 10 14 20 15 cel 6 veloped) Shops 2 1,500 SF Former Fresh & Easy 13,928 SF Shops 3 7,000 SF CVS Drug Store 13,013 SF Pad A (Undeveloped) JEFFERSON STREET FRED WARING DRIVEENDED S.P 07.06.18 FIGURE NO. 8EXISTING SITE PLAN C. SURROUNDING LAND USE In order to provide a context for project planning, surrounding land use is shown in Figure 4 Figure 9 . The subject property is bordered on the north by Fred Waring Drive, which is a six lane primary arterial roadway with a 120 foot wide right-of- way. The Esplanade single family residential subdivision is located directly across Fred Waring Drive, north of the project site. The project site is bordered on the east by Jefferson Street, a major arterial with 120 foot wide right-of-way. Property to the east of Jefferson Street is within the City of Indio’s jurisdictional boundaries and it has been developed as a retail center The Heritage Palms Golf Resort is located across Jefferson Street to the southeast. Land use immediately west of the site includes an existing well site, City park, and an existing retention basin associated with the recently developed residential subdivision (Monticello) further to the west. The rear yards of approximately seven single family residences of the Monticello, neighborhood exist along the southern periphery of the site. These homes are separated from the project site by an elevated berm with a six foot high masonry block perimeter wall and a dense planted landscape buffer. Project Setting 028 -029PROJECT SETTING FIGURE NO. 9 03_MASTER PLAN $PHQGHG6SHFLÀF3ODQ PARTI September 2018 030 - 03 MASTER PLAN 031MASTER PLAN A. SITE PLAN As shown in Figure 5 Project Site Plan, the Specific Plan No.2 would result in development of a Market, Drug Store (with a drive-thru), assorted retail and service oriented shops, possible restaurant uses, and one bank (refer to Table 2, Land Use Summary). The building areas of the seven potential building footprints are illustrated in Figure 6 10 Land Use Plan. The proposed footprints may be modified (enlarged or reduced) during final design, however, a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.25 0.30 will not be exceeded over the entire site. For the most part, the Specific Plan complies with the development standards of the site’s Neighborhood Commercial (CN) zoning designation Since drive-thru establishments are generally not allowed within the City’s CN zoning district, the Specific Plan seeks the City’s discretionary approval to allow drive-thru windows at the proposed drug store and bank buildings. As shown in Figure 10, the Amended Specific Plan No.3 would result in development of a food market (housed in the former Fresh & Easy store and the adjoining retail units), assorted retail and service- oriented shops, possible restaurant uses and a 160- room hotel associated with parcels 3,5 and 6. Parcels 4 & 7 are currently undeveloped, but still retains the Amended specific plan No.2 proposal, of assorted retail and service-oriented shops on parcel 7. And a Bank building (drive-thru) within parcel 4. Other Parcel within Jefferson Square site has been developed into retail-orientated shops (Parcel 2) and a drive-thru Drug store (Parcel 1). Figure 11 shows the proposed Site plan with description in the variations on parcel 3,5 &6 FLOOR AREA RATIO This Amended Specific Plan No.3 seeks the City’s discretionary approval to increase the allowable Floor Area Ratio (FAR) from 0.25 (as per code 9.90.040) to 0.30. PARKING The project provides landscape parking areas containing a total of 363 361 spaces. The required number of spaces for the Jefferson Square site is 358: this figure has been calculated using 1 space per 300 sq ft of retail space and 1.1 spaces per hotel room (as per code 9.150.070). If the square footage of any of the buildings changes, the number of required spaces also changes. The site plan will accommodate this change by providing the correct amount of spaces using the 1 space per 300 sq ft 250 sq. ft. ratio for general retail uses that are 100,000 sq ft 50,000 sq. ft. or greater. If restaurant uses are included on the site, the number of spaces required would be calculated using the 1 space per 125 sq.ft 250 sq. ft. ratio. The City Ordinance provides for restaurant uses that are part of shopping centers that are not in excess of 20% of the shopping center gross floor area to be allowed to use the parking ratio for the shopping center instead of using a separate restaurant parking ratio (1) SITE ACCESS Ingress/egress for the site will be taken from two locations along Fred Waring Drive, and two locations from Jefferson Street. Left turn lanes from these roadways will be provided at the western access along Fred Waring Drive, and the southern access on Jefferson Street. Deceleration lanes will be provided at the two entrances on Jefferson Street, and the eastern entrance on Fred Waring Drive. The project will also provide a dedicated right turn lane for eastbound traffic using Fred Waring Drive turning south onto Jefferson Street. WATER SUPPLY Domestic water services will be extended to the proposed hotel and retail site from an existing 18 inch water line at the northwest corner of the site along Fred Waring Drive, and an existing 12 inch water line near the southeast corner of the site at Jefferson Street. There is an existing connection to the former Fresh & Easy building which will be reinstated for use in the organic market. Sewer services will be extended from an existing 10 inch sewer line in Jefferson Street to the proposed MASTER PLAN 032 - hotel and retail site: there is an existing sewer connection to the former Fresh & Easy building. DRAINAGE Sewer services will be extended from an existing 10 inch sewer line in Jefferson Street. On site drainage will be conveyed to above ground retention basins, located on the south and west sides of the site, as well as to an underground retention system. On site drainage is currently conveyed to above ground retention basins, located on the south- east and north-west sides of the site, as well as to an underground retention system. The proposed additional automobile parking to the north west of the site will replace the above ground landscape retention area with a larger, underground retention basin that will connect to the existing retention system. TRASH Trash enclosures will be located at various points within the project site, and will be screened from view, to the extent feasible, by landscaping. The landscape plan maintains and enhances existing landscaped areas along Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, and will accent the project’s architectural theme within the site (see Section III C for additional discussion of landscaping). 033MASTER PLAN OSH Hotel Food Market Fresh & Easy Retail Parade CVS Shop 1 Shop 2 Shop 3 Pad A TOTAL SITE AREA . Land use and building size may be modified, and/or slightly reduced or enlarged during final design However, the maximum FAR of 0.25 0.30 will not be exceeded for the entire site, or at any individual lot. . Maximum floor area allowed within the Specific Plan is 117515 141018 Square feet. 8VH 6)$UHD  %XLOGLQJXVH  7DEOH/DQG8VH6XPPDU\ 1RRI6WRULHV )ORRU$UHD5DWLR 68,021 15,589 8,849 13,013 5,000 4,500 7,000 4,500 126,472 (2) 470,060 Hotel Market Retail Shops Drug Store Retail Shops Retail Shops Retail Shops Bank 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 26.90 20 15 5 Landscape Retention Area Adjacent Residences Shops 1 5,000 SF (Future Development) 87 8 14 12 Hotel 68,021 SF Retail Parade 8,849 SF JEFFERSON SQUARE LAND USE PLAN JSQ-PARTI-FIGURE 10 A 15'30'19'2'30'1'28'3 0 '30'9'19'8'12'30'10' 10' JSQ-AME Monticello Park LANDSCAPE PROVIDED: WITHIN PARKING AND PERIMETER & BUILDING AREAS: 60,534 SF (13.54%) INTERNAL COURTYARD: 35,287 SF (7.89%) TOTAL: 95,821 SF (21.43%) Notes: * Food Market area excludes the back of house 4,500 13,013 PAD A 1.0/300SF 15 DRUG CVS TOTAL 1.0/300SF 44 358 7,000 SFSHOP 3 1.0/300SF 24 5,000 SFSHOP 1 1.0/300SF 17 15,589 SFFOOD MARKET 1.0/300SF 52 8,849 SFRETAIL PARADE 1.0/300SF 30 USE HOTEL 160 RM 176GUEST RM X1.1 QUANTITY PARKING RATE REQUIRED PARKING (#STALLS) TOTAL SITE AREA: 10.79 AC (470,060 SF) TOTAL BUILT SITE COVERAGE: 29.82% LOADING BIKELANE28'41'43'27'26'27'50'41'49'30' 19'21'9' 9'19'19'19'9'9'10' 23'10'10'Under ground Retention Area 12 17 6 16 6 66699911 11 12 12 11 11 11 99 10 14 20 15 Food Market 15,589 SF Back of house 12,325 SF Shops 3 7,000 SF CVS Drug Store 13,013 SF Pad A 4,500 SF (Future Development) ENDED S.P 10.09.18 FIGURE NO. 10LAND USE PLAN Adjacent Residences 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 CAR PARKING AND LOADING Reconfigured parking lot zone to the south of the site proposed for the hotel and retail use. Trash bin moved slightly south to allow for fire truck turning radius. Proposed parking lot zone to the north west of the site will provide an additional 23 parking lots. The existing above landscape retention area will be replaced by an underground catch basin that connects to the existing retention system. Reconfigured van/truck loading bays for the hotel and food market Back of house Additional trash bins added for hotel. The existing road extended from 28ft is sufficient for fire truck access. 30ft hard surfaced road retained for fire truck access. 194 existing parking system are retained, including all DDA spaces to the north of the site. Proposed Hotel drop off zone. CHANGES TO EXISTING STRUCTURES The former Fresh and easy and ‘shop 2’ buildings will be re-purposed to hold a food market. The former F&E’s existing walls will be retained to house the market’s Back of house Retain existing facade of ‘shop 2’ PROPOSED STRUCTURES Hotel front of house, including lobby bar/ restaurant and events room. Hotel rooms arranged around a courtyard Retail units to lease Hotel Back of house JEFFERSON SQUARE PROPOSED CHANGES JSQ-PARTI-FIGURE 11 A 15'30'19'2'30'1'28'3 0 '30'9'19'8'12'30'10' 10' 13 14 1 JSQ-AME Monticello Park LOADING BIKELANE28'41'43'27'26'27'50'41'49'30' 19'21'9' 9'19'19'19'9'9'10' 23'10'10'JEFFERSON STREET FRED WARING DRIVE12 15 11 10 9 8 7 5 6 3 4 2 ENDED S.P 10.09.18 FIGURE NO. 11PROPOSED CHANGES B. PHASING PLAN The project will be developed in one phase. C. LANDSCAPE PLAN The purpose of the landscape plan is to establish standards that will contribute to the thematic development of the proposed project. Important to the development of a coordinated project image and identity are the project-wide enhancement of major streets, entries and internal spaces. These elements are designed to establish levels of hierarchy that will provide a varied and high quality experience at the pedestrian and vehicular level within and surrounding the project. The landscape concept and the proposed plant palette for the project are shown in figure 8 figure 12 Conceptual Plan. In general, Landscaping associated with the project consists of two basic types: project perimeter and streetscape; and project site and building landscaping The project’s relationships with residential properties and Monticello Park will be negotiated with a careful planting palette. Landscaping associated with the project will form a buffer zone with the residential properties to the south and create a relationship with the western edge of Monticello Park. The existing 5ft landscaped buffer condition with the Park was approved in the previous Specific Plan No.2 and this proposal will retain this minimum buffer zone. The hotel will also provide a publicly accessible landscaped courtyard with a range of plants outlined in the Landscape Plan. Conceptual landscape plan approval of streetscapes along Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street is being pursued with this Specific Plan. The landscape concept for the project perimeter and streetscape will incorporate limited turf areas, along with a colorful mix of water efficient groundcovers and accent shrubs. In order to integrate the project into the surrounding community and create a harmonious street frontage, the streetscaping along Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson will maintain a plant palette and design concept which is compatible with surrounding street frontages and will conform to City Design Guidelines. The retail buildings will have a residential feeling, using plentiful ornamental material in order to provide a temperate environment. Uncovered parking areas will be shaded with a combination of Palo Verde , and Desert Museum trees. Palm trees will be used to provide vertical scale and aesthetic contrasts. Tipu Trees, Acacia, and Chitalpa Trees may be used to help screen views from adjacent residential areas. Species in addition to those listed are to be considered in order to provide diversity. The associated plant materials have been chosen for their adaptability to the desert climate of La Quinta, their relationship to the existing surrounding developments, and the intended use and function with the project. Shrubs along the street perimeters shall be minimum 5 to 15 gallon size. ),*85( 1235(/,0,1$5</$1'6&$3( 3/$1 D. CIRCULATION PLAN As shown in Figure 9 Figure 13, the project Circulation Plan is typical of a commercial center, with an internal system of sidewalks, walkways, and access aisles serving the various building locations, parking areas, and patio locations. On site circulation provides for both vehicular and pedestrian movement throughout the site. VEHICULAR External access to the various uses on site is from two locations along Fred Waring Drive, and two locations along Jefferson Street. Deceleration lanes are provided at the two entrances on Jefferson Street, and the eastern entrance on Fred Waring Drive. The southernmost access on Jefferson Street and the westernmost access on Fred Waring Drive provides left turning lanes into the site from these peripheral roadways. The remaining two ingress/ egress locations provide restricted, right turn in - right turn out access only. There is also a dedicated right turn lane for eastbound traffic using Fred Waring Drive turning south onto Jefferson Street. On Jefferson Street, the left turning lane into the project is 650 feet south of the intersection with Fred Waring Drive. On Fred Waring Drive the left turning lane is 540 feet west of the intersection MASTER PLAN 038 - with Jefferson Street. Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive are designated in the general plan as major arterial roads. The half-width of a major arterial is 60 feet of right of way and 51 feet of pavement. The current half-width right of way for both streets received an additional 5 feet of dedicated right of way under the amended Specific Plan No.2 dedicated an additional 9 foot wide and 100 foot long right of way to accommodate the dedicated right turn lane at the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. The 12 foot wide and 50 foot long standard Sunline bus turnout on Jefferson Street has also been completed. The Amended Specific Plan No.3 would provide a total of 361 parking spaces on site, and would implement a reciprocal parking agreement among all uses on site which will be made part of the conditions of the Building Management Association. The City of La Quinta Municipal Code No. 9.150.080.A8(b) requires that projects containing a total of 351-450 parking spaces, which take access from a major or primary arterial, to maintain a minimum distance of 70 feet from on site parking spaces and/ or parking isles to provide for stacking. However, in lieu of implementing the 70-foot throat requirement, the project will incorporate deceleration lanes at both of the Jefferson Street entrances into the site. If the total number of parking spaces changes, the minimum distance from on site parking spaces and/or parking isles also changes the site plan provides for this by using a standard of a 90 -foot throat, required for projects containing 451 or more parking spaces, in the deceleration lanes at three of the site entrances, as noted above. Direct access to the drugstore drive through lanes would be taken from the easternmost accessway location along Fred Waring Drive. A right turn would be provided approximately 50 feet from the right-of-way, into two 12 foot wide drive-thru lanes located on the north side of the drug store building. Each lane would provide enough stacking to accommodate up to seven automobiles (~120 feet) per lane, without obstructing the accessway. Drive-thru traffic would exit the property at the northern most ingress/egress location along Jefferson Street. The western most accessway along Fred Waring Drive will provide access into the interior parcels via a 30-foot wide lane located between Fresh & Easy and Shops 3. The westernmost entry will serve as the primary truck access for Fresh & Easy, with those trucks then continuing out the perimeter drive to exit at the southern accessway on Jefferson. Bank A will also have drive-thru lanes. Direct access to the drive- thru at Bank A will be from the southern accessway along Jefferson Street. To screen views of waiting cars from the street, each drive-thru will have a 4 foot wall or a combination of a wall and berm totaling 4 feet. The primary internal circulation corridors extend from all access points on Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive. Delivery trucks will access the loading docks at the side of the food market and hotel loading bay this is done by entering the north east accessway on Fred Waring Drive, they would exit the same way the delivery trucks came in.(Figure 13). Delivery trucks will access the loading docks at the rear of OSH by entering the southern accessway on Jefferson, and they would exit the site at the western most accessway on Fred Waring Drive. A service isle is provided along the rear of the OSH and Fresh & Easy stores, allowing for trucks to make a simple backing entry into dock areas, and then to drive forward to an exit point of the site. (see Figure 9). A loading dock is also provided at the rear of the drug store with access from the eastern most accessway on Fred Waring Drive. The internal access isles have been designed to create a functional network for vehicular movement throughout the site and associated parking isles. The southern site entrance on Jefferson Street provides a direct route to shops on the southern end of the property and to OSH. PEDESTRIAN Pedestrian sidewalks and on -street bicycle lanes are provided along both the Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street frontages (see Figure 13). Sidewalks will be designed 8 feet wide and on street bicycle lanes will be 4 feet wide. A functional network of sidewalks and walkways are provided within the site to link individual building sites, and facilitate safe pedestrian movement throughout the development. A bus stop will be provided along Jefferson Street which will be linked to the internal pedestrian system. The Hotel will utilize the existing connection between Monticello park. 039MASTER PLAN KNIPHOFIA UVARIA BOUGAINVILLEA OOH LA LA CAESALPINIA PULCHERRIMA CASSIA NEWMOPHIA ENCELIA FARINOSA FOUQUIERIA SPLENDENS HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA 5 GALRED HOT POKER BOUGANIVILLEA RED BIRD OF PARADISE DESERT CASSIA BRITTLEBUSH OCOTILLO RED YUCCA LARREA TRIDENTATA CREOSOTE BUSH LEUCOPHYLLUM FRUTESCENS TEXAS RANGER MUHLENBERGIA CAPILLARIS REGAL MIST MUHLENBERGIA LINDHEIMERI AUTUMN GLOW MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS DEER ORASS RUELLIA PENINSULARIS BAJA RUELLIA 8'HT 10-CANES HERNIARIA GLABRA LANTANA HYBRID LANTANA HYBRID LANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS LANTANA 'NEW GOLD' HYMENOXYS ACAULIS VEBENA GOODDINGII SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME SIZE GROUND COVER 1 GAL @ 12' OC COMMON NAME GREEN CARPET SPREADING SUNSET CONFETTI PURPLE LANTANA NEW GOLD LANTANA ANGELITA DAISY VERBENA DESERT GOLD 3/8 MINUS. 2" DEPTH IN ALL DESERT PLANTERS CALIFORNIA GOLD 3/8 MINUS 2" DEPTH IN ALL DESERT PLANTERS 2" TO 4" BAJA CRESTA FRACTURED ROCK SURFACE SELECT BOULDERS 5 GAL 5 GAL 8'HT 10-CANES AIRPAVE FIRE TRUCK ACCESS LANE WITH POROUS PAVING 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL SHRUBS SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME SIZECOMMON NAME 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 1 GAL 1 GAL 1 GAL 1 GAL ACACIA SALICINA WILLOW ACACIA CERCIDIUM HYBRID DESERT MUSEUM CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM PALO VERDE TIPUANA TIPU TIPU TREE BRAHEA ARMATA MEXICAN BLUE PALMTIPUANA TIPU TIPU TREE BUTIA CAPITATA PINDO PALM PARKINSONIA ACULEATA PALO VERDE BOTANICAL COMMON TREES 24' BOX 36' BOX 24' BOX 36' BOX 12'8" 12'8" 24' BOX CHITALPA TASHKENTENSIS CHITALPA 36' BOX BUTIA CAPITATA PINDO PALM PROPOSED BRAHEA ARMATA MEXICAN BLUE PALMTIPUANA TIPU TIPU TREE PROPOSED TIPUANA TIPU TIPU TREE PROPOSED CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM PALO VERDE PROPOSED CHITALPA TASHKENTENSIS CHITALPA PROPOSED 36' BOX 24' BOX 36' BOX 12'8" 12'8" SYMBOL SIZE Notes: Proposed landscape buffer with adjacent residences with variety of tall trees and lower shrubs to obscure views into/ from the hotel. New fire truck path constructed with permeable materials to facilitate drainage, Fire department to confirm if pavement is suitable. Reconfigured delivery bay creates additional parking lots. All proposed landscape work are illustrated in color. 1 1 2 2 3 4 4 PRELIMINARY LAND SCALELEGEND JEFFERSON SQUARE PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN JSQ-PARTI-FIGURE 12 A JSQ-AME PRELI LOADING BIKELANE3 ENDED S.P FIGURE NO. 12IMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN 10.09.18 Vehicular circulation Food Market Truck Loading Drug Store Truck Loading Unsignalized Intersection Restricted Access- Right turn/Turn out Bus stop Signalized Intersection 2 3 1 LEGEND JEFFERSON SQUARE CIRCULATION PLAN JSQ-PARTI-FIGURE 13 A 1 15'30'19'2'30'1'28'30 '30'9'19'8'12'30'10' 10' JSQ-AME LOADING BIKELANE28'41'43'27'26'27'50'41'49'30' 19'21'9' 9'19'19'19'9'9'10' 23'10'10'2 1 3 ENDED S.P 2 FIGURE NO. 13CIRCULATION PLAN 10.09.18 E. GRADING PLAN The developer will submit a PM10 Plan (dust control plan) for the project in accordance with the applicable City and Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) standards and codes, prior to the issuance of any grading permits. The project Grading and Drainage Plan is shown in Figure 10 Figure 14. The subject property has already been mass graded to an average elevation of 45 feet above sea level. Precise grading of the site will result in development of seven building pads, an above and underground retention system, and associated parking areas designed to convey surface drainage flows to appropriate catch basins on site. The site will be graded from the highest pad elevation of 48. 5 feet in the south western corner of the site to low pad elevations of 44.5 feet at the Jefferson/Fred Waring corner. The proposed parking on top of the existing North East landscape retention area will be serviced by a catch basin attached to the existing underground system. In total, approximately 50,000 cubic yards of earthwork would be required, and all grading will be balanced on site without the need for borrow or disposal sites. Since the site has already been mass graded, precise grading would only result in minor deviations from existing grade. The associated earthwork will be fairly evenly distributed throughout the site with an average of less than one to two feet being added or removed at most locations. Final grading will match finished elevations on surrounding properties and will not result in significant manufactured cut/fill slopes. Precise Grading Plans are subject to review and approval by the City according to standard engineering protocols. F. DRAINAGE PLAN The project’s construction contractor, in consultation with the City of La Quinta, shall be responsible for filing all required notices with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), preparing the Strom Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and implementing required Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the project. The project drainage plan proposes to direct surface runoff into a number of catch basins located throughout the site (see Figure 14). Stormwater will be conveyed from the individual catch basins into an underground storm drain system, and ultimately to an underground retention system located near the center of the site and above ground retention basins, located on the west and south sides of the site. All stormwater will be retained on site. The exact size and design of the proposed storm drain facilities will be determined by the final engineering design and will be reviewed by the City via standard plan check protocols to ensure that the drainage is adequately addressed. G. SEWER PLAN Sewer service to the project is provided by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) via an existing 10 inch sewer line within the right of way of Jefferson Street along the site’s eastern property line. As shown on conceptual sewer & water plan, the project will construct 2 -8” on site sewer main (Private). One 8” main will run south east corner of project from front side of Hotel/retail shop OSH Building and will be connected to existing 10” sewer main in Jefferson Street. This line will pick up sewer laterals for OSH building Hotel/retail shop & Shop 1. Another 8” sewer main will be constructed in northeast side of project which will start from existing manhole located in Jefferson Street. This will extend westward into the central portion of the site, where a proposed manhole would be located and then ninety degrees south and north long the front of the Market where it would terminate at a manhole near shops 2. Sewer laterals for Shops 2, Food Market Fresh & Easy, Shops 3, Drug Store and Pad A will be connected to this sewer main. ),*85(14&21&(378$/*5$',1*  '5$,1$*(3/$1 H. WATER PLAN Water Service will also be provided to the site by CVWD and is available to the property from an existing 18 inch water line located within Fred Waring Drive at the northwest corner of the site and existing 12 inch line in Jefferson Street at the southeast corner of the site as shown on conceptual sewer & water plan. Domestic, irrigation and fire flow water will be taken from these water lines. The project will include off site extensions to these MASTER PLAN 044 - existing water lines to facilitate the necessary on site extensions. New on site waterlines will consists of 12 inch main lines extending from CVWD’s offsite service lines at two points, one along Fred waring drive and another at Jefferson Street using 12” double detector check assembly. 1.5 inch to 3 inch service lines will be used for lateral extensions to individual building pads. The internal system would result in a looped network of water lines designed to serve individual building pads, fire hydrants and the project’ s landscape irrigation infrastructure. I. OTHER UTILITY PLANS Natural Gas- Natural gas service is provided to the site by The Gas Company, which currently maintains a 4 inch gas line within the right of way for Fred Waring Drive, at the project’s northwest corner. The required extensions to facilitate service to the site would be routine, and would be coordinated with The Gas Company through their design review and approval process prior to the issuance of grading permits for the project. Electric- Electric service is provided to the site by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), which currently maintains existing above ground 92 kV and 12.5 kV transmission lines within the right of way for Fred Waring Drive along the project’s northern property line. The project will extend lines from IID’s existing 12.5 kV line onto the site. All on site transmission lines will be placed underground. IID anticipates service for this project to be routine. Telephone- Telephone service is provided to the site by Verizon, which maintains existing telephone lines within the right of way for Fred Waring Drive approximately 400 feet west of the project limits. Verizon serves the Monticello residential development area to the west of the property from a terminal located at the intersection of Monticello Avenue and Fred Waring Drive. Verizon engineering staff do not anticipate any difficulty extending services along Fred Waring Drive or Jefferson Street and connecting to the project. Service for this project would be routine. Cable Television- Cable Television service is provided to the site by Time Warner Cable and is available to the property from existing cable within the right of way for Fred Waring Drive along the project’s northern property line. Installation of cable television would be coordinated with the extension of electrical service so that a single trench containing both facilities would be constructed. Time Warner Cable considers service for this project to be routine. 045MASTER PLAN PRELIMINARY GRA /2$',1*/2$',1*221/,*$,*/2$'127)25&216758&7,21FIGURE NO. 14ADING PLAN WQMP EXH /2$',1* :403(;+,%,7 FIGURE NO. 15HIBIT 04_DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS $PHQGHG6SHFLÀF3ODQ PARTI September 2018 050 - 04 DEVEL- OPMENT REGS 051DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS The development regulations contained herein provide specific standards relative to permitted land uses in addition to site design and construction regulations to be applied within the Specific Plan area. They are intended to protect the public health, safety and welfare and to create a harmonious relationship with surrounding land. In general, this Specific Plan is consistent with the CN Zone of the City of La Quinta Zoning Code unless a different standard is identified below. The proposed land uses are consistent with the NC land use designation in the City’s General Plan. Should a development standard contained in this Specific Plan conflict with an equivalent standard contained in the City of La Quinta Zoning Code, the provisions of the Specific Plan shall take precedence. In instances where the Specific Plan does not address a particular regulation, the applicable portion of the City of La Quinta Zoning Code shall govern. The Community Development Director shall have the authority to approve minor adjustments during development permit review, so long as he determines such adjustments are consistent with the Specific Plan Land Use Plan. A. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED This Specific Plan shall allow all uses identified as Permitted as a principal use, permitted as an accessory to the principal use, Permitted as a principal or accessory use if a Conditional Use Permit is approved, Permitted if a minor use permit is approved, and Permitted as a temporary use as identified in and subject to the provisions of the Neighborhood Commercial (CN) Zoning District described in Section 9.80.040 of the La Quinta Zoning Code. This Specific Plan shall also allow Hotels and Motels as permitted uses. B. PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS -Maximum structure height: 35 feet (2) -Max Structure Height within 150 feet of Arterial Hwy: 22 feet (3) -Maximum number of stories:1 3 -Maximum Floor Area Ratio: 0.25 0.30 -Building Setbacks (4) -from Jefferson Street: 30 feet (3) -from Fred Waring Drive: 30 feet (3) -from common property line: 30 feet 40 feet -from OS and Park Districts: 20 feet -Landscape Setback (5) -from Jefferson Street: 20 feet (3) -from Fred Waring Drive: 20 feet (3) -from Open Space/Park Districts: 5 1 feet minimum -from residential areas : 15 feet 2. Not including architectural appendages, such as a roof parapet or tower, up to 41 feet. 3. Not including up to 10% of the building mass, which may extend up to 36feet. This does not affect the area of the proposed project but applies to other parcels contained within the previous Specific Plan No2. 4. Number given is minimum building setback from the Street right-of-way. In addition to the required landscape setback, the building setback may contain parking, driveways and similar facilities. 5. Landscape setback shall consist of landscaped area within the building setback. Number given is minimum landscaped area from the street right-of-way. 6. The previous Specific Plan No.2 proposed general retail development above 100,000 sq ft and thus required 1 space per 250 sq ft GFA. For general retail uses under 100,000 sq ft (as proposed in this Amendment No.3) the minimum parking requirement is 1 space per 300 sq ft GFA, as per Code 9.150.070 7. The minimum hotel parking requirement is 1.1 spaces per guest room, as per Code 9.150.070 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 052 - -Interior Landscape (6) -parking areas: 5% of project area -non parking areas: 5% of project area -Required Parking -Retail Stores: One space per 250 300 square feet (sf) Gross Floor Area (GFA) (6) -Restaurant: One space per 250 sf of GFA, when restaurant is not more than 20% of shopping center floor area. -A facility to accommodate a minimum of five bicycles shall be provided for any restaurant use. -Other Uses: The parking provisions of the La Quinta Zoning Code Section 9.150 shall apply. -Hotel: 1.1 spaces per guest room (7) 053DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 05_DESIGN GUIDELINES $PHQGHG6SHFLÀF3ODQ PARTI September 2018 054 - 05 DESIGN GUIDE- LINES 055DESIGN GUIDELINES The Design Guidelines for the Specific Plan have been developed as a method of achieving a high quality, cohesive design character for the development of the proposed project in La Quinta. They provide specific design criteria for the development of the project, as well as encouraging creativity, imagination and a high level of harmony and consistency within the surrounding community. Adherence to the Design Guidelines will create a desirable asset to the community and enhance the project’s overall value. These guidelines will govern the design quality of the project for application in the following ways: -To provide the City of La Quinta with the necessary assurance that the Specific Plan area will develop in accordance with the quality and character proposed; -To provide guidance to developers, builders, engineers, architects, landscape architects and other professionals in order to maintain the desired design quality; -To provide guidance to City staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council in the review of construction plans for the Specific Plan area. A. ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES The building design theme of this commercial complex strives to achieve a Mediterranean style architecture. In utilizing elements from this vernacular the complex achieves a massing and scale that is comforting and pleasing. Textured plaster, deep canopies, and trellises allow for contrast and shade, while simplified cornice detailing and the use of color unifies the different building elements within the complex. Figures 12, 12.1, 13, 13.1, 14,15 16, 16.1,17, 17.1, 18, 19 illustrate the typical building elevations and use of the vernacular to unify and provide a sense of scale for the in-line tenants. The figures also illustrate the use of the vernacular for a typical outlying pad building and how the architectural style is continuous around the exterior of the pad building. Figure 16 20, 21, 21.1, 21.2 shows cross sections of the site taken from various locations on the site The elevations used for the specific plan provide a basis for acceptable materials and usage for the various buildings and do not deem to illustrate specific examples of tenants, or building occupants. Through the use of extensive canopies, trellises, landscaping, patterned sidewalks and patios, the complex achieves a campus like environment, suitable for pedestrian movement between the various elements of the complex.(Amended Specific Plan No.2) Many of the qualities of the Mediterranean inspired architecture will be employed in the modern ‘desert-style’ facades of the hotel building. Light shade play, color and pattern will be used to add detail and create similarities between the styles. MASSING & SCALE -Varied proportions are encouraged. Elements in facades should be spaced at regular intervals to create a visual rhythm, colonnade effect. Plaster pop -outs on the building sides, where not beneath an arcade, shall be 3’-5’ in depth, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. -Each building will incorporate a continuity of mass, scale and architectural features and similar detailing. -The facade of in-line retail stores shall be off- set to help break up building mass and give the appearance of multiple buildings. -Accent features such as medallions, awnings and color banding should be utilized/encouraged, for continuity of scale between the elements/ buildings. ROOF TREATMENTS -Appropriate use of flat, hip, shed, and pitched gable roof forms are encouraged. -Flat roofs may be used with a parapet alone, or in combination with other roof forms. -The use of variable ridge lines on a single structure is encouraged. -Roof pitch may vary between buildings in the complex. DESIGN GUIDELINES 056 - -Mechanical equipment may be placed only on flat portions of roofs provided that they are screened from public view and that the screening is incorporated into building design. -Roof pitch on any one structure should be consistent within the limitations of the material being used. ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND DETAILS -All mechanical equipment including fuse boxes, heating and cooling devices and satellite dishes shall be screened from public view. The building parapet heights shall be adjusted so that roof elements are screened from view. -The use of curtain walls is not allowed. Separate screening walls, shall only be used as an exception, and shall be designed to utilize building materials and colors. -Exterior walls should emphasize shadow relief using recesses, medallions, covered walkways, trellises, and landscaping where appropriate. -Building entryways should be visually emphasized, and try to keep sense of pedestrian scale. -Shaded walkways are encouraged in areas with high levels of pedestrian traffic. -Conversion of first floor windows to exterior tenant entries is allowed subject to Staff approval of architectural details. -Accent at corners of pad buildings by using small tower features is encouraged. WALLS AND FENCES -Walls are encouraged to use materials and colors which match or compliment associated/ adjacent buildings and context. -Walls that create long, unbroken straight lines should be avoided when possible by varying the parapets or with use of color and accents Buildings in the desert-modern style may use straight unbroken lines but care should be taken to combine this with materials of interest and quality to ensure a visually exciting facade. LIGHTING -Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and the adjoining/related landscape. -Lighting standards and buildings fixtures should be of a design and size compatible with the building and adjacent areas. Exposed wall packs should be avoided. -Lighting shall be restrained in design and excessive brightness (night glow) avoided. -Standard design techniques should be employed to shield parking light fixtures and control direct glare and spill light emanating from these fixtures. Parking lot light poles should be equipped with a fixture and lamping that is compatible with adjacent properties, and a flush lens and should not exceed a maximum height of 18 feet above parking lot surface. 057DESIGN GUIDELINES FOOD MARKET 28ft 35ft CONCRETE PERFORATED STACKED BLOCKS COLOR: LIGHT GARY (WHITE PIGMENT) METAL SCREEN COLOR: DARK BROWN METAL WINDOW FRAME COLOR: BLACK FINISH: POWDER COATED FINE METAL BALUSTRADE COLOR: BROWN FINISH: POWDER COATED EXTERIOR CURTAIN COLOR: WHITE PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: CROSSROADS #DE5359 PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: MESA TAN #DEC718 PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: PORUS STONE #DE6220 PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: DECEMBER SKY #DE6352 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 METAL PORTECOCHERE FINISH: BRASS PAINT COLOR: ROSE F #DE5111 RETAIL 38ft 31ft 11 12 13 14 15 16 12 17 18 20 JEFFERSON SQUARE ELEVATIONS-HOTEL/ SHOP 2/ FOOD MARKET JSQ-PARTI-FIGURE 16 A FOOD MARKET HOTEL 38ft 31ft 0ft 26ft26ft 35ft 23ft 130603 02 0106EXISITNG JSQ-AME ELEVATIONS- HOTEL/ SHO 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 FUSION PAINT COLOR: CLIPPED GRASS #DE5552 PAINT COLOR: LION'S MANE #DE5319 PAINT COLOR: CITY OF PINK ANGELS #DET434 PAINT COLOR: FLAME #DE5237 PAINT COLOR: CORNFLOWER #DE586 PAINT COLOR: LA VIE EN ROSE #DET416 PAINT COLOR: CLOISTERED GARDEN #DET523 PAINT COLOR: ORANGE DAYLILY #DE5145 PAINT COLOR: SCARLET APPLE #DEA146 PAINT COLOR: MELTED COPPER #DE5244 23ft 8.5ft 13ft 36ft 21 13 02 01 06 EXISITNGPROPOSED 03 t ENDED S.P FIGURE NO. 16OP 2/ FOOD MARKET 10.09.18 HOTEL 1 03 03 0504 02 JEFFERSON SQUARE ELEVATION- HOTEL/ SHOP 2/ FOOD MARKET JSQ-PARTI-FIGURE 16.1 A FOOD MARKET 23ft 09 07 10 08 03 01 PROPOSEDEXISITNG HOTEL RETAIL 38ft 31ft 23ft 8.5ft 06 06 060403050304 11 030201 CONCRETE PERFORATED STACKED BLOCKS COLOR: LIGHT GARY (WHITE PIGMENT) METAL SCREEN COLOR: DARK BROWN METAL WINDOW FRAME COLOR: BLACK FINISH: POWDER COATED FINE METAL BALUSTRADE COLOR: BROWN FINISH: POWDER COATED EXTERIOR CURTAIN COLOR: WHITE PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: CROSSROADS #DE5359 PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: MESA TAN #DEC718 PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: PORUS STONE #DE6220 PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: DECEMBER SKY #DE6352 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 METAL PORTECOCHERE FINISH: BRASS PAINT COLOR: ROSE F #DE5111 JSQ-AME ELEVATIONS- HOTEL/ SHO 38ft 31ft 01 03 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 FUSION PAINT COLOR: CLIPPED GRASS #DE5552 PAINT COLOR: LION'S MANE #DE5319 PAINT COLOR: CITY OF PINK ANGELS #DET434 PAINT COLOR: FLAME #DE5237 PAINT COLOR: CORNFLOWER #DE586 PAINT COLOR: LA VIE EN ROSE #DET416 PAINT COLOR: CLOISTERED GARDEN #DET523 PAINT COLOR: ORANGE DAYLILY #DE5145 PAINT COLOR: SCARLET APPLE #DEA146 PAINT COLOR: MELTED COPPER #DE5244 ENDED S.P FIGURE NO. 16.1OP 2/ FOOD MARKET 10.09.18 *Refer to Figure 16,16.1 for updated proposed elevation zi r+.l6w4ffije-Y f .r .er l'4' AMENDED 3.24.08 *Refer to Figure 16,16.1 for updated proposed elevation FC `f ROUE m ie ETI OdFrc r # 33 12.1 MALffmTIW,I W I . .... NORTH ELEVATION SCALE - , f 16' ; 9 '-W EAST ELEVATION SCALE - 1 /16' _ 1, SOUTH ELEVATON Elevations - Shops 1 FIGURE NO. 17 iwr " at A F,I,.-= w .r JFFFERSON SQUARE SPEC I F I c P L A N FIGURE NO. 17.1 i`fm - i .11• lil ! - � 1• i -L L:xm JEFFER ON SQUARE SPEC 1 f 1 C PLAN FIGURE NO. 18 Elevation - Pad NORTH ELEVATION SGALJKwl/I '_1'-W EAST ELEVATION SCALE F 10 TO% riS" SOUTH ELEVATK3N SCALE- 1)1 G':,'-Q' AMj!74oEo ,a_31.W FIGURE NO. 19 *Refer to Figure 21, 21.1, 21.2 for addition site sections ABOVE GROUND RETENTION BASIN FIGURE NO. 20 JSQ-PARTI-FIGURE 21 SITE SECTIONS RE FIGURE NO. 21ESIDENTIAL JSQ-PARTI-FIGURE 21.1 SITE SECTIONS RE FIGURE NO. 21.1ESIDENTIAL JSQ-PARTI-FIGURE 21.2 SITE SECTIONS RE FIGURE NO. 21.2ESIDENTIAL MATERIALS & COLORS -The facade plays an integral role in building appearance and should use a continuous palette of similar materials and colors. -Restraint should be exercised in the number of materials and colors selected for a given structure. -Acceptable construction materials are steel, wood, stucco, concrete, plaster, ceramic tile, natural stone, aluminium and glass. -Architectural details should be painted to match the facade. -The following identifies the general colors and materials which will serve as a working palette to provide a basis of establishing architectural cohesiveness for the project (changes may occur at time of Architectural review) -Trellis structures shall be color finished metal tube structures. Paint Colors: ( Manufacturer: Dunn Edwards Paint Company or equal) Main Building Colors These colors would be used on large wall surfaces, but could also be used as accents Paint 1. Amber Dawn #DE2277 2. Biscuit #DE5330 3. Golden Crest #DE5353 4. Crossroads # DE5359 S. Lustrous Yellow #DE5472 6. Aloe Plant #DE5563 7. Light Aspiration #DE6185 8. Rattan Basket #DE6201 9. Calico Rock #DE6229 10. Union Springs #DE6243 11. Mesa Tan #DEC718 12. Adobe 4DEC726 Trim Colors 1. Calla Lily #DE5498 2. Marble Dust #DE6156 3. Porous Stone #DE6220 Stone Eldorado Stone Bouquet/ Flintstone Roof Tile Monier Lifetile Type: Slate Color. Cherrywood Metal Awnings Berridge Double Rib Panel Colors: Hartford Green & Colonial Red Windows Material: Steel or Aluminium Frames with true divided lights Color: Ral #502 1 Glazing: Clear [Light to Medium Bronze Tint with prior written approval] Hardscape Color Accents Chromix& #C-26 Antique Cork #C-27 Westwood Brown These conditions are applied to Parcels 4 & 7 which are currently undeveloped. The following ‘Main building colors’ refers to the material proposal of Parcels 3,5 and 6. DESIGN GUIDELINES 082 - Main Building Colors (Parcel 3,5,6) -The facade materials for the hotel, retail parade and back of house have been carefully chosen to sit harmoniously alongside the Mediterranean vernacular popular in La Quinta, while being iconic, contemporary and environmentally intelligent. -The following identifies the general colors and materials which will serve as a working palette to provide a basis of establishing architectural cohesiveness for the project Paint (Existing) Color: 1.Crossroads #DE5359 2.Mesa Tan #DEC718 3.Porus Stone #DE6220 4.December Sky #DE6352 Paint Color: 1.Rose Fusion #DE5111 2.Clipped Grass #DE5552 3.Lion’s Mane #DE5319 4.City of Pink Angels #DET434 5.Flame #DE5237 6.Cornflower #DE586 7.La Vie en Rose #DET416 8.Cloistered Garden #DET523 9.Orange Daylily #DE5145 10.Scarlet Apple #DEA146 11.Melted Copper #DE5244 Concrete Perforated stacked blocks Color: Light gray (white pigment) Metal Screen Finish: Dark Brown Metal Window Frame Finish: Powder Coated Color: Black Fine Metal Balustrade Finish: Powder coated Colour: Brown Exterior Curtain Color: White Metal Portecochere Color: Brass Fabric curtains Colour: White Tiles Terracotta Roof 1.Hotel: Thermoplastic Polyolefin (Tpo) 2.Retail: Polyurethane spray & painted to match retail facade. 3.Roof Patio: Timber Decking (Sptted Gum) 083DESIGN GUIDELINES SUSTAINABILITY Sustainable design adopts passive, low energy strategies to operate the building. The project will prioritise passive methods of cooling, ventilation and shading which have governed the design of low-energy, sustainable desert buildings for centuries, including; - natural wind ventilation - solar panels for electricity production - materials with high thermal mass for heat retention and release - low energy water pumps and water recycling units The project will harness natural ventilation driven by the prevailing wind. Differential temperatures created by a building fabric with high thermal mass also drives natural ventilation, and complements an efficient distribution of cooling vents across the building. By utilising natural ventilation and producing efficient on-site energy through solar panels the project will become an exemplar of global sustainable design in the heart of La Quinta. These low energy production and conservation strategies will supplement existing utilities infrastructure at Jefferson Square: a strategy for their integration into the existing utilities plan will be developed with civil and environmental engineers. LIGHT AND SHADE The project will adopt a thorough solar shading strategy, which will be essential to mitigate overheating and will augment the environmental performance of the buildings’ materials. Precedents of successful desert shading strategies around the world range from filigree timber shading slats, to adjustable metal louvres which adapt to the changing sun position throughout the day. The project’s approach to modulate natural light and prevent overheating will be defined by the solar path across the site. The project’s south facing facade will combat the high midday sun whilst the east and western facades will block low-oncoming rays from the morning or late- afternoon sun. The project’s precise shading strategy will be developed with environmental consultants and approved by the City Council during design reviews. ICONIC DESIGN Iconic design will complement the sophisticated environmental and material strategies to elevate the project to become a ‘gem in the desert’; and located just beyond the Jefferson Square I-10 interchange, the proposed development will announce the gateway to La Quinta. The project will create a unique atmosphere, memorable photo opportunities and become a landmark development to celebrate La Quinta’s heritage. The project will employ architecture with a distinctive, playful character that will embrace the creative design ideas that have made hospitality and retail developments successful in Palm Springs. The strength of hospitality and retail development at Jefferson Square will be reinforced by iconic design: the project will seize the opportunity to set global design trends within the heart of La Quinta. EXPERIENTIAL DESIGN Allied with the broader environmental and architectural guidelines is the project’s strategy for the more intimate pedestrian scale. The project will choreograph unique experiences through framed views, material accents and sensitivity to the human experience of the site. This attention to the architectural detail will ensure the project is coherent in quality and ambition across all scales of the development. DESIGN GUIDELINES 084 -085DESIGN GUIDELINES %6,*1*8,'(/,1(6 A detailed sign program for the Specific Plan area will be submitted under a separate sign permit subsequent to Specific Plan approval. The developer shall secure the sign permit from the City of La Quinta Building and Safety Department by submitting three (3) copies of the fully dimensioned scaled drawings as follows: a) A site plan showing the location of the occupant space on the site. b) An elevation of the occupant space drawing to scale and showing sign placement and occupant space width. c) A detailed elevation of the sign drawn to scale and showing all colors, materials, dimensions and copy. d) Fabrication and installation details, including structural and engineering data, UL electrical specification, and type and intensity of illumination (for electrical signs). e) Any other drawing, details and information as required by the City of La Quinta. Since the Jefferson Square Specific Plan site is located at a secondary gateway into the City of La Quinta, the project will provide an approximate 468 square foot area at the northeast corner of the site for a City monument sign. The design and ultimate construction of the City’s monument sign will be the City’s responsibility, and will be completed subsequent to development of the Specific Plan at the City’s discretion. Landscaping and continued landscape maintenance within the sign area shall be the responsibility of the project’s Building Management Association. &/,*+7,1**8,'(/,1(6 -Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and the adjoining landscape. -Lighting standards and building fixtures should be of a design and size compatible with the building and adjacent areas. -Lighting shall be restrained in design and excessive brightness (night glow) avoided. -Standard design techniques will be employed to shield parking light fixtures from adjacent land uses and control direct glare and spill light emanating from these fixtures. -Parking lot light poles will be equipped with a recessed lamp and a flush lens and not exceed a maximum height of 18 feet throughout the site. -The average foot candles (fc) for the project site would be 1.8 fc, with a maximum of 4.9 fc and a minimum of 0.7 fc. '/$1'6&$3(*8,'(/,1(6 The guidelines presented herein are not intended to discourage creative design or individuality. Rather, they are intended to assist in providing the continuity and desired image which will make the proposed project a unique and special commercial community center. *HQHUDO*XLGHOLQHV -Groundcovers should be used to enhance the appearance of the project and protectn soil from erosion. Acceptable groundcover includes gravel, rocks or living plant materials. Tree bark and shredded wood products, which are lightweight and subject to wind and water erosion, are prohibited. -Water efficient landscape materials, including native plants, with drip irrigation should be used wherever possible as a means of conserving scarce water resources and minimizing maintenance costs. -Landscaping should be designed to screen above ground utility equipment, service areas and trash containers. Homogenous, visually subtle plant materials should be selected for use in these areas in order not to focus attention on the objectionable items. (QWU\ZD\V -Areas which serve as a focus of vehicular traffic, such as project entries, should be accented by the use of colorful shrubs and ground covers for DESIGN GUIDELINES 086 - enhanced visual interest. These shrubs and ground covers may include Bougainvillea, Purple and gold Lantana, Verbina, and Angelita Daisy. -Project entries should utilize vertical accents such as palm trees to provide a sense of arrival to the facility with California Fan Palms of varying heights. -Plant materials at project entries should be located so as to avoid interfering with motorist sight lines. Plant combinations shall leave an area from 30 inches above grade open to allow for unobstructed vision of approaching vehicles and pedestrians. %XLOGLQJV -Plant materials should be used to soften long stretches of blank wall surface. -Landscape materials shall be selected with colors and textures which enhance architectural elements. 6WUHHWVFDSHV -Streetscapes should incorporate informal masses of trees and shrubs. -Streetscapes fronting the project should maintain a plant palette and design concept which is compatible with surrounding finished street frontages. 3DUNLQJ/RWV -Plant material will consist of Lantana groundcover, Palo Verde and Desert Museum trees, and Desert Cassia and Regal Mist, shrubs which will allow sight line over shrubs yet provide islands that are green. -The design of parking lots should include provisions for canopy trees to provide shade for parked vehicles. -Parking areas should be screened from adjacent roadways by the use of low walls, landscaping, or berms. 087DESIGN GUIDELINES 00_OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES $PHQGHG6SHFLÀF3ODQ PARTI September 2018 088 - 06 OPERA- TIONS 089OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES A. HOURS OF OPERATION The retail uses on site will operate from 6:00 AM to 12: 00 AM, Monday through Sunday. The Food Market and Drug Store would also be open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Though the number of at the food market is open to the public would be a management decision. The hotel will also operate for public use during the same hours. Hotel guest will be able to check in 24 hours seven days a week after check-in hotel guest can move freely with the same time constraints. %75$163257$7,21'(0$1' 0$1$*(0(17 According to the guidelines contained in the City’ s Transportation Demand Ordinance (Section 9. 180.030), this project is required to make provisions for transportation demand management. In response to this requirement, the project shall incorporate the following measures: -The project shall make provisions for bicycle racks in accordance with City Zoning Code Section 9.150.050.D.3.c. -The project shall identify a Transportation Demand Coordinator to promote participation in TDM programs among employees. -The TDM Coordinator shall encourage ride sharing, bus ridership, telecommuting,flexible work schedules, and other TDM programs as feasible and appropriate. &0$,17(1$1&( Maintenance of buildings, parking facilities, common walkways and landscaped areas, sewers, drainage facilities, utilities, and any other improvements not dedicated to public use shall be maintained by the projects Building Management Association. On site facilities and landscaping shall be maintained in a clean, attractive and safe condition in accordance with City regulations. OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES 090 -091OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN TITLE AND LAND USE DESIGNATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXISTING AND PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION EXISTING LAND USE EXISTING AND PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION PROPOSED LAND USE TOTAL GROSS SITE AREA (GSA) TOTAL NET SITE AREA (NSA) TOTAL BUILDING SITE AREA PARKING AREA OF NET SITE TOTAL LANDSCAPING AREA NUMBER OF PARKING RATIO REQUIRED BY CITY NUMBER OF CAR PARKING SPACES REQUIRED BY CITY NUMBER OF AMERICAN WITH ADA PARKING SPACES REQUIRED GREATEST NUMBER OF STORIES AND SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA PER FLOOR GREATEST HEIGHT OF ANY BUILDING OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEX ARCHITECTURAL SHEET DISCRIPTION ABCDEF EXISTING LAND USE JEFFERSON SQUARE JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL & RETAIL DEVELOPMENT SW CORNER OF JEFFERSON & FRED WARING DR. LA QUINTA, CA 92253 ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS REVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. $77$&+0(17 LOADING BIKELANEHOTEL 68,021 SF FOOD MARKET 15,589 SF JEFFERSON ST.FRED WARING DR.MONTICELLO PARK 20 17 6 12 16 6 14 20 10 15 11 111111 99 95 4 9666878 12 11 12 1114 10 2 15 5 LANDSCAPE RETENTION AREA HOTEL DROP OFF 15'30'19'2'30'1'28'28'41'43'27'26'27'50'41'49'30' 30 '30'LOADING AREA UNDERGROUND RETENTION AREA 19'21'9'9' 9'19'19'19'9'19'8'12'30'10' 10' 9'10' 23'10'10'GATES LOCKED AT ALLTIME, AUTOMATED OPENING IF FIRE AIRES ADJACENT RESIDENTIALPROPERTIES RETAIL 8,849 SF B.O.H 12,152 SF GATES LOCKED AT ALLTIME, AUTOMATED OPENING IF FIRE AIRES FIRE ACCESS LANE TO WITH HOLD 75,000 POUNDS OVER 2-AXILS BUS AND COACH STATION STOP ID: 247 LANDSCAPE AREAP PR LDR RL LDR RL GC CN PLOT DIVISION LEGEND LOTS DIVISION PUBLIC EASEMENT VIEW ABOVE FIRE TRUCK ACCESS EXISTING BUILDINGS UNDEVELOPED PLOTS FIRE HYDRANTS TURNING CIRCLE NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. ACACIA SALICINA WILLOW ACACIA CERCIDIUM HYBRID DESERT MUSEUM CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM PALO VERDE TIPUANA TIPU TIPU TREE BRAHEA ARMATA MEXICAN BLUE PALMTIPUANA TIPU TIPU TREE BUTIA CAPITATA PINDO PALM PARKINSONIA ACULEATA PALO VERDE BOTANICAL COMMON TREES 24' BOX 36' BOX 24' BOX 36' BOX 12'8" 12'8" 24' BOX KNIPHOFIA UVARIA BOUGAINVILLEA OOH LA LA CAESALPINIA PULCHERRIMA CASSIA NEWMOPHIA ENCELIA FARINOSA FOUQUIERIA SPLENDENS HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA 5 GALRED HOT POKER BOUGANIVILLEA RED BIRD OF PARADISE DESERT CASSIA BRITTLEBUSH OCOTILLO RED YUCCA LARREA TRIDENTATA CREOSOTE BUSH LEUCOPHYLLUM FRUTESCENS TEXAS RANGER MUHLENBERGIA CAPILLARIS REGAL MIST MUHLENBERGIA LINDHEIMERI AUTUMN GLOW MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS DEER ORASS RUELLIA PENINSULARIS BAJA RUELLIA 8'HT 10-CANES HERNIARIA GLABRA LANTANA HYBRID LANTANA HYBRID LANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS LANTANA 'NEW GOLD' HYMENOXYS ACAULIS VEBENA GOODDINGII SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME SIZE GROUND COVER 1 GAL @ 12' OC COMMON NAME GREEN CARPET SPREADING SUNSET CONFETTI PURPLE LANTANA NEW GOLD LANTANA ANGELITA DAISY VERBENA DESERT GOLD (DECOMPOSED GRANITE) 3/8 MINUS. 2" DEPTH IN ALL DESERT PLANTERS CALIFORNIA GOLD 3/8 MINUS 2" DEPTH IN ALL DESERT PLANTERS 2" TO 4" BAJA CRESTA FRACTURED ROCK SURFACE SELECT BOULDERS 5 GAL 5 GAL 8'HT 10-CANES CHITALPA TASHKENTENSIS CHITALPA 36' BOX AIRPAVE FIRE TRUCK ACCESS LANE WITH POROUS PAVING BUTIA CAPITATA PINDO PALM PROPOSED BRAHEA ARMATA MEXICAN BLUE PALMTIPUANA TIPU TIPU TREE PROPOSED TIPUANA TIPU TIPU TREE PROPOSED CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM PALO VERDE PROPOSED CHITALPA TASHKENTENSIS CHITALPA PROPOSED 36' BOX 24' BOX 36' BOX 12'8" 12'8" 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL SHRUBS SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME SIZECOMMON NAME 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 1 GAL 1 GAL 1 GAL 1 GAL SYMBOL SIZE LOADING BIKELANEJEFFERSON ST.FRED WARING DR.PLOT DIVISION LEGEND LOTS DIVISION PUBLIC EASEMENT VIEW ABOVE FIRE TRUCK ACCESS EXISTING BUILDINGS UNDEVELOPED PLOTS FIRE HYDRANTS TURNING CIRCLE NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. LOADING BIKELANEPLOT DIVISION LEGEND LOTS DIVISION PUBLIC EASEMENT VIEW ABOVE FIRE TRUCK ACCESS EXISTING BUILDINGS UNDEVELOPED PLOTS TURNING CIRCLE NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. LOT 26 BACKYARDLOT 25 BUILDING MASONRY WALL LANDSCAPE ROAD LANDSCAPE CIRCULATION HOTEL ROOM PARKING LOTLANDSCAPE FIRE ACCESS LANE PAVEMENT RETAIL HOTEL ROOMS MONTICELLO PARK FIRE ACCESS LANE 30' FAMILY SUITE STANDARD ROOM FAMILY SUITE PATIO/BALCONY HOTEL ROOM NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. RETAIL 671SF RETAIL 671SF FWC 144SF MWC 177SF CIRC 178SF CLUBHOUSE REST 1210SF SPA 292SF SPA 292SF CLUBHOUSE BAR 909SF CLUBHOUSE LOUNGE 600SF CLUBHOUSE SOCIAL 803SF MAID RM 77SF CIRC 182SF CIRC 148SF CLUBHOUSE CHECK 1007SF LT L0B 82SF SPA RM-04 88SF SPA RM-03 88SF SPA RM-02 88SF SPA RM-01 88SF CIRC 291SF STR 51SF CIRC 1150SF CIRC 120SF CIRC 190SF CIRC 190SF CIRC 986SF CLUB HOUSE COURTYARD 35287SF CIRC 10498SF LANDSCA 1815F CIRC 753SF RETAIL 671SF RETAIL 671SF COURTYARD STORAGE 500SF MAIDS RM 152SF COURTYARD MEP 353SF STR 51SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 134SF CAB RM 328SF CAB WC 106SF BAL 134SF CAB RM 328SF CAB WC 106SF BAL 134SF CAB RM 328SF CAB WC 106SF BAL 134SF CAB RM 328SF CAB WC 106SF BAL 134SF CAB RM 328SF CAB WC 106SF BAL 134SF CAB RM 328SF CAB WC 106SF BAL 134SF CAB RM 328SF CAB WC 106SF BAL 134SF CAB RM 328SF CAB WC 106SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SFFAM RM 233SF KD RM 97SF FAM WC 52SF BAL 115SF FAM RM 233SFKD RM 97SF FAM WC 52SF BAL 115SF MAID RM 82SF RETAIL 1035SFRETAIL 671SF RETAIL 671SF RETAIL 671SFRETAIL 671SFRETAIL 671SF RETAIL 671SF LANDSCAPE 552F RETAIL 671SF FOOD MARKET 13,750SF LOADING BAY/B.O.H 2428SF MWC 230SF FWC 232SF CIRC 300SF STORAGE 900SF LAUNDRY 1,185SF CIRC 1,026SF CIRC 121SF FIR RIS 22SF STANDARD ROOM PROGRAM LEGEND FAMILY SUITE CABANA SUITES ON BED ROOM SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE BALCONY/PATIO BALCONY/PATIO PATIO BALCONY BALCONY CHECK-IN LOUNGE BAR RESTAURANTS SOCIAL SPA/TREATMENT FITNESS BALLROOM MALE W.C FEMALE W.C STORAGE LOBBY/ CIRCULATION M.E.P MARKET HALL LOADING BAY LAUNDRY OFFICE SECURITY RETAIL RETAIL W.C ROOF TOP GARDEN LEVEL 01 TOTAL G.I.A 13,750 SFFOOD MARKET 24,716 SFHOTEL 6,422 SFB.O.H 8,849 SFRETAIL TOTAL 53,737 SF NOTE:DATE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY.SCALE 88°88°88°88°88°88°88°88°88° 12" 1/4" 12" 3" 12" 1/4" 12" 1/4" 12" 3"12"3"12"8"12" 8" 12" 8" 12" 8" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 8"12"8" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 5" 12" 5" 12"5"12"5" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6"150°150° AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC 88°88° 12" 5" 12" 5" 12"5"12"5" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6" AC 12" 3" 12" 3" AC 88° AC AC COURTYARD BELOW MAID RM 77SF CIRC 285SF FWC 138SF MWC 138SF MAID RM 80SF CIRC 737SF YOGA STUDIO 568SF CLUBHOUSE REST 367SF CLUBHOUSE SOCIAL 571SF CLUBHOUSE BAR 516SF GYM 568SF LOBBY 441SF CIRC 78SFSTR 51SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF BAL 89SF STD RM 286SF STR 51SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF FAM RM 233SF KD RM 97SF FAM WC 52SF BAL 115SF FAM RM 233SFKD RM 97SF FAM WC 52SF BAL 115SF MAID RM 82SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 77SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF FAM RM 233SF KD RM 97SF FAM WC 52SF BAL 149SF MAID RM 82SF FAM RM 233SF KD RM 97SF FAM WC 52SF BAL 149SF CIRC 3599SF 12" 22" SECURITY 248SF CIRC 1187F F.M SEATING 1817SF OFFICE 248SF HOTEL MEP 1038SF STORAGE 896SF STORAGE 862SF STORAGE 391SF F.M MEP 858SF STANDARD ROOM PROGRAM LEGEND FAMILY SUITE CABANA SUITES ON BED ROOM SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE BALCONY/PATIO BALCONY/PATIO PATIO BALCONY BALCONY CHECK-IN LOUNGE BAR RESTAURANTS SOCIAL SPA/TREATMENT FITNESS BALLROOM MALE W.C FEMALE W.C STORAGE LOBBY/ CIRCULATION M.E.P MARKET HALL LOADING BAY LAUNDRY OFFICE SECURITY RETAIL RETAIL W.C ROOF TOP GARDEN LEVEL 02 TOTAL G.I.A 20,964 SFHOTEL 5,730 SFB.O.H 1,817 SFFOOD MARKET TOTAL 28,511 SF NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. 88°88°88°88°88°88°88°88°88° 12" 1/4" 12" 3" 12" 1/4" 12" 1/4" 12" 3"12"3"12"8"12" 8" 12" 8" 12" 8" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 8"12"8" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 5" 12" 5" 12"5"12"5" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6"150°150° AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC 88°88° 12" 5" 12" 5" 12"5"12"5" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6" AC 12" 3" 12" 3" AC 88° AC AC 12" 22" MAID RM 77SF BALLROOM 3005SF LOBBY 834SF PREP RM 241SF FWC 138SF MWC 138SF MAID RM 80SF CIRC 285SF CIRC 697SF SUT BR 179SF BAL 158F SUT LIV 193SF SUT WC 104SF CLT 38SFLOB 59SF SUT BR 179SF BAL 158F SUT LIV 193SF SUT WC 104SF CLT 38SFLOB 59SF SUT BR 179SF BAL 158F SUT LIV 193SF SUT WC 104SF CLT 38SFLOB 59SF SUT BR 179SF BAL 158F SUT LIV 193SF SUT WC 104SF CLT 38SFLOB 59SF SUT BR 179SF BAL 158F SUT LIV 193SF SUT WC 104SF CLT 38SFLOB 59SF SUT BR 179SF BAL 158F SUT LIV 193SF SUT WC 104SF CLT 38SFLOB 59SF SUT BR 179SF BAL 158F SUT LIV 193SF SUT WC 104SF CLT 38SFLOB 59SF SUT BR 179SF BAL 158F SUT LIV 193SF SUT WC 104SF CLT 38SFLOB 59SF PRS BR 129SF BAL 282SF PRS CLT 42SF PRS WC 101SF CIRC 18SF PRS LOB 70SF PRS LIV 342SF WC 33SFPRS KIT 52SF STD RM 284SF BAL 78SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF BAL 58SF STD RM 286SF STD RM 284SF BAL 78SF STD RM 284SF BAL 78SF STD RM 284SF BAL 78SF STD RM 284SF BAL 78SF STD RM 284SF BAL 78SF STD RM 284SF BAL 78SF STD RM 284SF BAL 78SF STD RM 284SF BAL 78SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF BAL 126SF STD RM 286SF STR 51SF STR 51SF CIRC 3178SF FAM RM 233SF KD RM 97SF FAM WC 52SF BAL 149SF MAID RM 82SF FAM RM 233SF KD RM 97SF FAM WC 52SF BAL 149SF 12" 1/4" 12" 1/4" 12" 5" 12" 6" 12" 5/16" AC AC AC 12" 5" 12" 5"12"5"12"5"12"6"12"6"12" 6" AC AC AC SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LTSKY LT SKY LTSKY LT SKY LT STANDARD ROOM PROGRAM LEGEND FAMILY SUITE CABANA SUITES ON BED ROOM SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE BALCONY/PATIO BALCONY/PATIO PATIO BALCONY BALCONY CHECK-IN LOUNGE BAR RESTAURANTS SOCIAL SPA/TREATMENT FITNESS BALLROOM MALE W.C FEMALE W.C STORAGE LOBBY/ CIRCULATION M.E.P MARKET HALL LOADING BAY LAUNDRY OFFICE SECURITY RETAIL RETAIL W.C ROOF TOP GARDEN LEVEL 03 TOTAL G.I.A 22,341 SFHOTEL TOTAL 22,341 SF NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. 12" 1/4" 12" 1/4" 12" 5" 12" 6" 12" 5/16" AC AC AC 12" 5" 12" 5"12"5"12"5"12"6"12"6"12" 6" AC AC AC SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LTSKY LT SKY LTSKY LT SKY LT 88°88°88°88°88°88°88°88°88° 12" 1/4" 12" 3" 12" 1/4" 12" 1/4" 12" 3"12"3"12"8"12" 8" 12" 8" 12" 8" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 8"12"8" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 5" 12" 5" 12"5"12"5" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6"150°150° AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC 88°88° 12" 5" 12" 5" 12"5"12"5" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6" 12" 6" AC 12" 3" 12" 3" AC 88° AC AC 12" 22" ACAC ACAC AC AC AC AC AC ACAC SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT WEDDING DECK 1193SF LIFT LOB 524SF LIFT LOB 351SF ORGANIC ROOF GARDEN PATIO 4736SF SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT SKY LT LIFT SHAFT LIFT SHAFT AC VOID VOID SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SPSP 12" 1/4"12" 1/4" 12" 1/4" 12" 1/4" 12" 1/4" 12" 1/4" 12" 1/4" MATERIAL: TPO COLOR:WHITE MATERIAL: TPO COLOR: WHITE MATERIAL: TIMBER COLOR: SPOTTED GUM MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #E9845C MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #B5C947 MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #EBC450 MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #FAB942 MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #BE8335 MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #A0C9FD MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #B5C947 MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #DAB2AD MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #DAB2AD MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #734951 MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #BE8638 MATERIAL: PS COLOR: #EBC450 MATERIAL: METAL PORTECOCHERE FINISH: BRASS EXIST: CONCRETE ROOFING TILES EXIST: MATERIAL: METAL AWNING PAINT: BERRIDGE -"COLONIAL RED" EXIST: CERTAINTEED FLINTLASTIC GMS COOLSTAR SBS MODIFIED BITUMEN ROLL ROOFING WITH REFLECTANT COOLSTAR COATING EXIST: CONCRETE ROOFING TILES EXIST: CERTAINTEED FLINTLASTIC GMS COOLSTAR SBS MODIFIED BITUMEN ROLL ROOFING WITH REFLECTANT COOLSTAR COATING STANDARD ROOM PROGRAM LEGEND FAMILY SUITE CABANA SUITES ON BED ROOM SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE BALCONY/PATIO BALCONY/PATIO PATIO BALCONY BALCONY CHECK-IN LOUNGE BAR RESTAURANTS SOCIAL SPA/TREATMENT FITNESS BALLROOM MALE W.C FEMALE W.C STORAGE LOBBY/ CIRCULATION M.E.P MARKET HALL LOADING BAY LAUNDRY OFFICE SECURITY RETAIL RETAIL W.C ROOF TOP GARDEN LEVEL 03 TOTAL G.I.A 22,341 SFHOTEL TOTAL 22,341 SF NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. FOOD MARKET HOTEL 38ft 31ft 0ft 26ft26ft 35ft 23ft 130603 02 0106EXISITNG FOOD MARKETRETAIL 38ft 31ft 23ft 8.5ft 13ft 36ft 28ft 35ft 11 12 13 14 15 16 12 17 18 20 21 13 02 01 06 EXISITNGPROPOSED 03 HOTEL RETAIL 38ft 31ft 23ft 8.5ft 06 06 060403050304 11 030201 FOOD MARKET HOTEL 23ft 38ft 31ft 09 07 10 08 03 01 03 03 0504 01 0302 PROPOSEDEXISITNG CONCRETE PERFORATED STACKED BLOCKS COLOR: LIGHT GARY (WHITE PIGMENT) METAL SCREEN COLOR: DARK BROWN METAL WINDOW FRAME COLOR: BLACK FINISH: POWDER COATED FINE METAL BALUSTRADE COLOR: BROWN FINISH: POWDER COATED EXTERIOR CURTAIN COLOR: WHITE PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: CROSSROADS #DE5359 PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: MESA TAN #DEC718 PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: PORUS STONE #DE6220 PAINT (EXISTING) COLOR: DECEMBER SKY #DE6352 PAINT COLOR: #E9845C PAINT COLOR: #B5C947 PAINT COLOR: #EBC450 PAINT COLOR: #FAB9A2 PAINT COLOR: #BE8335 PAINT COLOR: #A0C9FD PAINT COLOR: #DAB2AD PAINT COLOR: #A9B395 PAINT COLOR: #ED875D PAINT COLOR: #734951 PAINT COLOR: BE8638 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 METAL PORTECOCHERE FINISH: BRASS NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. 38ft 31ft 26ft 0ft 35ft FOOD MARKET HOTEL EXISITNG 38ft 31ft 23ft 0ft 11ft 36ft 35ft 23ft 8.5ft FOOD MARKETRETAIL EXISITNGPROPOSED 23ft 38ft 31ft 21ft 11ft 21ft 0ft 8.5ft HOTEL RETAIL 25ft 38ft 31ft 0ft 21ft 11ft FOOD MARKET HOTEL PROPOSEDEXISITNG NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. FOOD MARKET13,750SF LOADINGBAY/B.O.H2428SF MWC230SF FWC232SF CIRC300SF STORAGE900SF LAUNDRY1,185SF CIRC1,026SF CIRC121SF FIR RIS22SF LOT 25 BACKYARDLOT 24 BUILDING MASONRY WALL LANDSCAPE OFFSET 15'ROAD 30'PARKING LOT 18' CIRCULATION STANDARD STANDARD STANDARD EXTERIOR FACADE IS DESIGNED TO BE PERFORATED TO ALLOW NATURAL VENTILATION AND ALSO PROVIDE SCREENING TO THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL FACADE 38ft 31ft LOT 26 BACKYARDLOT 23 BUILDING MASONRY WALL LANDSCAPE OFFSET 15'ROAD 31'LANDSCAPE 6'RE LOT 25 BACKYARDLOT 23 BUILDING MASONRY WALL LANDSCAPE OFFSET 15'ROAD 30'PARKING LOT 18' FAMILY SUIT STANDARD RO FAMILY SUIT CIRCULATION H TREE AND SHRUBS PROVIDES SCREEN INTO LOT 23 BACKYARD NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. LOT 26 BACKYARDLOT 26 BUILDING MASONRY WALL LANDSCAPE OFFSET 21'ROAD 38'LANDSCAPE 6' FAMILY SUITE FAMILY SUITE CIRCULATION PRESIDENTIAL SUIT TREE AND SHRUBS PROVIDES SCREEN INTO LOT 23 BACKYARD LOT 25 BACKYARDLOT 25 BUILDING MASONRY WALL LANDSCAPE OFFSET 15'ROAD 30'PARKING LOT 18' CIRCULATION STANDARD ROOM STANDARD ROOM STANDARD ROOM EXTERIOR FACADE IS DESIGNED TO BE PERFORATED TO ALLOW NATURAL VENTILATION AND ALSO PROVIDE SCREENING TO THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL FACADE FOOD MARKET13,750SF LOADINGBAY/B.O.H2428SF MWC230SF FWC232SF CIRC300SF STORAGE900SF LAUNDRY1,185SF CIRC1,026SF CIRC121SF FIR RIS22SF NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. LOT 26 BACKYARDLOT 26 BUILDING MASONRY WALL LANDSCAPE OFFSET 21'ROAD 38'LANDSCAPE 6' FAMILY SUITE FAMILY SUITE CIRCULATION PRESIDENTIAL SUIT TREE AND SHRUBS PROVIDES SCREEN INTO LOT 23 BACKYARD FOOD MARKET13,750SF LOADINGBAY/B.O.H2428SF MWC230SF FWC232SF CIRC300SF STORAGE900SF LAUNDRY1,185SF CIRC1,026SF CIRC121SF FIR RIS22SF LOT 25 BACKYARDLOT 23 BUILDING MASONRY WALL LANDSCAPE OFFSET 15'ROAD 30'PARKING LOT 18' FAMILY SUIT STANDARD RO FAMILY SUIT CIRCULATION H TREE AND SHRUBS PROVIDES SCREEN INTO LOT 23 BACKYARD MONTICELLO PARKFIRE ACCESS LANE 30' FAMILY SUITE STANDARD ROOM FAMILY SUITE PATIO/BALCONY OM NOTE:DATE SCALE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY. ADULT POOL 11557SF FAMILY POOL 870SF TREES KNIPHOFIA UVARIA BOUGAINVILLEA OOH LA LA CAESALPINIA PULCHERRIMA CASSIA NEWMOPHIA ENCELIA FARINOSA FOUQUIERIA SPLENDENS HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA 5 GALRED HOT POKER BOUGANIVILLEA RED BIRD OF PARADISE DESERT CASSIA BRITTLEBUSH OCOTILLO RED YUCCA LARREA TRIDENTATA CREOSOTE BUSH LEUCOPHYLLUM FRUTESCENS TEXAS RANGER MUHLENBERGIA CAPILLARIS REGAL MIST MUHLENBERGIA LINDHEIMERI AUTUMN GLOW MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS DEER ORASS RUELLIA PENINSULARIS BAJA RUELLIA 8'HT 10-CANES HERNIARIA GLABRA LANTANA HYBRID LANTANA HYBRID LANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS LANTANA 'NEW GOLD' HYMENOXYS ACAULIS VEBENA GOODDINGII SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME SIZE GROUND COVER 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL SHRUBS SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME SIZECOMMON NAME 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 1 GAL 1 GAL 1 GAL 1 GAL BRAHEA ARMATA MEXICAN BLUE PALMTIPUANA TIPU TIPU TREE BUTIA CAPITATA PINDO PALM 1 GAL @ 12' OC COMMON NAME GREEN CARPET SPREADING SUNSET CONFETTI PURPLE LANTANA NEW GOLD LANTANA ANGELITA DAISY VERBENA CALIFORNIA GOLD 3/8 MINUS 2" DEPTH IN ALL DESERT PLANTERS 2" TO 4" BAJA CRESTA FRACTURED ROCK SURFACE SELECT BOULDERS 5 GAL 5 GAL 8'HT 10-CANES AIRPAVE FIRE TRUCK ACCESS LANE WITH POROUS PAVING LAWN TRUF 12'8" 12'8" DESERT GOLD (DECOMPOSED GRANITE) 3/8 MINUS. 2" DEPTH IN ALL DESERT PLANTERS NOTE:DATE SHEET NO. CLIENTPROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLEREVISIONARCHITECTISSUE DRAWN BY APP BY.SCALE LOADING28'28'30'38' 23' 32' 35'17'16'FOOD MARKET13,750SF LOADINGBAY/B.O.H2428SF MWC230SF FWC232SF CIRC300SF STORAGE900SF LAUNDRY1,185SF CIRC1,026SF CIRC121SF SHEET NO.: DRAWING TITLE: DATE:08-21-2018 DRAWN BY: PROJECT NO.: NO.DATE REVISIONS: REVISIONJEFFERESON SQUARE HOTELPHOTOMETRIC ANALYSISLA QUINTA, CAMRC ENGINEERING, INC.- Plotted August 21, 2018 - 10:55 am P:\2018\18050 CCDH - JEFFERSON SQUARE HOTEL - PHOTOMETRIC ANALYSIS\_WD\E1.0- BRADLEY LIGHTING.DWGFile Path & Name:C2016PROJECT: CHECKED BY: 18050 Professional Engineers & Lighting Consultants 3 4300 Gateway Drive, Suite 120 Palm Desert, CA 92211 o: 760-340-9005 f: 760-340-9100 GL FR PHOTOMETRIC ANALYSIS 11"=30'-0" SCALE:E1.0 PHOTOMETRIC ANALYSIS - Statistics Description Symbol Avg Max Min Max/Min Avg/Min Driveway 1.7 fc 4.6 fc 0.7 fc 6.6:1 2.4:1 LIGHT FIXTURE CUTSHEET STATISTICS Parking 2.7 fc 5.5 fc 1.3 fc 4.2:1 2.1:1 /2$',1*/2$',1*221/,*$,*/2$'127)25&216758&7,21 /2$',1* :403(;+,%,7 11514-02 Letter March 23, 2018 Ms. Nicole Criste Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc. 42635 Melanie Place, Suite 101 Palm Desert, CA 92211 SUBJECT: JEFFERSON SQUARE TRIP GENERATION ASSESSMENT Dear Ms. Nicole Criste: The firm of Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit the following Trip Generation Assessment for the proposed Jefferson Square development (referred to as “Project”) located on the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street in the City of La Quinta. INTRODUCTION The previous land use assumptions for the site was evaluated in the Jefferson Square – Trip Generation Comparison (January 24, 2008, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., “Urban Crossroads Trip Generation Memo”) and Focused Traffic Impact Study for The Jefferson Square Shopping Center (May 2008, prepared by Clyde E. Sweet and Associates, “Clyde Sweet Focused Traffic Study”). The Urban Crossroads Trip Generation Memo consisted of 16,500 square feet (sf) of retail, 13,928 sf of supermarket uses, a 42,500 sf hardware stores, a 4,500 sf drive thru bank, and a 13,013 sf pharmacy/drug store. The Project is currently proposing to replace the retail uses with a hotel. The land use evaluated in Clyde Sweet Focused Traffic Study was 90,441 sf of retail shopping center. The previous site plan is shown on Exhibit 1. The Project is currently proposed to consist of a 162-room hotel, 16,568 sf of food market and 8,849 sf of retail. It should be noted that the project site also consists of existing 13,013 sf pharmacy/drug store, 7,000 sf of retail and future retail pads of approximately 9,500 sf. The currently proposed site plan is shown on Exhibit 2. The purpose of this trip generation assessment is to compare the number of trips generated by the current proposed uses to the previous study assumptions and the land use assumptions for the site in the City of La Quinta General Plan. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION Trip generation represents the amount of traffic which is both attracted to and produced by a development. Determining traffic generation for a specific project is therefore based upon forecasting the amount of traffic that is expected to be both attracted to and produced by the specific land uses being proposed for a given development. The trip generation rates used for this assessment are based upon information collected by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) as provided in their Trip $77$&+0(17 Ms. Nicole Criste Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc. March 23, 2018 Page 2 of 2 11514-02 Letter Generation Manual (10th Edition, 2017). Rates applicable to the Trip Generation Assessment are shown on Table 1. The trip generation summary for the proposed Project, existing pharmacy/retail and the future retail pads is shown on Table 2. The Project site based on currently proposed uses is anticipated to generate 5,500 trip-ends per day with 213 AM peak hour trips and 482 PM peak hour trips. GENERAL PLAN TRIP GENERATION The City of La Quinta General Plan designates the Project site as General Commercial land use area. Per the General Plan, commercial land uses have a floor-area ratio (FAR) of 0.22. Based on 10.31 acres for the site, the quantity used for the purposes of this trip generation is 98,803 sf. As shown on Table 3, the currently adopted land use for the site is anticipated to generate a total of approximately 5,963 trip-ends per day with 200 AM peak hour trips and 539 PM peak hour trips. The development of the proposed Project is anticipated to generate 463 fewer trip-ends per day with 13 more AM peak hour trips and 57 fewer PM peak hour trips as compared to the land use currently adopted in the City of La Quinta General Plan. TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS STUDIES As shown in Table 3, the development of the proposed Project is anticipated to generate 2,461 fewer trip-ends per day with 22 fewer AM peak hour trips and 376 fewer PM peak hour trips as compared to the Urban Crossroads Trip Generation Memo. As shown in Table 3, the development of the proposed Project is anticipated to generate 1,616 more trip-ends per day with 66 more AM peak hour trips and 103 fewer PM peak hour trips as compared to the Clyde Sweet Focused Traffic study. If you have any questions, please contact me directly at (949) 336-5982. Respectfully submitted, URBAN CROSSROADS, INC. Pranesh Tarikere, PE Senior Engineer Table1 ITELU AMPeakHour PMPeakHour LandUse1 Code Units2 In Out Total In Out Total Hotel 310 RM 0.28 0.19 0.47 0.31 0.29 0.60 8.36 ShoppingCenter(AverageRate) 820 TSF 0.58 0.36 0.94 1.83 1.98 3.81 37.75 ShoppingCenter(Equation)3 820 TSF 1.26 0.77 2.03 2.62 2.83 5.45 60.35 Supermarket 850 TSF 2.29 1.53 3.82 4.71 4.53 9.24 106.78 Pharmacy/DrugstorewithDriveͲThrough 881 TSF 2.04 1.80 3.84 5.15 5.14 10.29 109.16 1TripGenerationSource:InstituteofTransportationEngineers(ITE),TripGenerationManual,10thEdition(2017). 2TSF=ThousandSquareFeet;VFP=VehicleFuellingPositions 3RatescalculatedbasedonITEequationsforLUC820for98,803sfShoppingCenter ProjectTripGenerationRates Daily Table2 LandUse Quantity Units 2 In Out Total In Out Total Hotel 162 RM 45 31 76 50 48 98 1,354 Retail 8.849 TSF 5 3 8 16 18 34 334 FoodMarket 16.568 TSF 38 25 63 78 75 153 1,769 ProposedProjectSubͲTotal 88 59 147 144 141 285 3,457 Retail 7.000 TSF 4 3 7 13 14 27 264 Pharmacy/DrugstorewithDriveͲThrough 13.013 TSF 27 23 50 67 67 134 1,420 ExistingRetailSubͲTotal 31 26 57 80 81 161 1,684 Retail 9.500 TSF 6 3 9 17 19 36 359 FutureRetailPadsSubͲTotal 6 3 9 17 19 36 359 125 88 213 241 241 482 5,500 1TripGenerationSource:InstituteofTransportationEngineers(ITE),TripGenerationManual,10thEdition(2017). 2TSF=ThousandSquareFeet;VFP=VehicleFuellingPositions ProjectTripGenerationSummary AMPeakHour PMPeakHour Daily ProposedProject TotalSiteTrips ExistingBuildings FutureRetailPads Table3 LandUse Quantity Units 2 In Out Total In Out Total GeneralCommercial 98.803 TSF 124 76 200 259 280 539 5,963 ProposedProject 125 88 213 241 241 482 5,500 Variance 1 12 13 Ͳ18 Ͳ39 Ͳ57 Ͳ463 1TripGenerationSource:InstituteofTransportationEngineers(ITE),TripGenerationManual,10thEdition(2017). 2TSF=ThousandSquareFeet 3GeneralCommercialSquareFootagebasedon10.31acresofcommercialretailat0.22FAR(FloorAreaRatio) GeneralPlanTripGenerationComparison AMPeakHour PMPeakHour Daily Table4 AM PM Daily 235 858 7,961 213 482 5,500 Ͳ22 Ͳ376 Ͳ2,461 AM PM Daily 147 585 3,884 213 482 5,500 66 Ͳ103 1,616 1JeffersonSquareTripGenerationComparison(January24,2008,preparedbyUrbancrossroads,Inc.) 2FocusedTrafficImpactStudyForTheJeffersonSquareShoppingCenter(May2008,Clyde,Sweet&Associates) Weekday SiteOccupant Weekday SiteOccupant TripGenerationComparisonwithPreviousTrafficStudies ClydeSweetFocusedTrafficStudy2: ProposedProject: Variance UrbanCrossroadsTripGenerationMemo1: ProposedProject: Variance Jefferson Square Trip Generation Assessment EXHIBIT 1: PREVIOUS SITE PLAN IL -1 "e -1 r. ` 11514 - siteplan.dwg URBAN CROSSROADS Jefferson Square Trip Generation Assessment EXHIBIT 2: CURRENT PROPOSED SITE PLAN 11514 - siteplan.dwg URBAN CROSSROADS 11514-05 Letter July 23, 2018 Ms. Nicole Criste Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc. 42635 Melanie Place, Suite 101 Palm Desert, CA 92211 SUBJECT: JEFFERSON SQUARE FOCUSED TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT AND PARKING EVALUATION Dear Ms. Nicole Criste: The firm of Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit the following Focused Traffic Assessment and Parking Evaluation for the proposed Jefferson Square development (referred to as “Project”) located on the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street in the City of La Quinta. INTRODUCTION The previous land use assumptions for the site were evaluated in the Jefferson Square – Trip Generation Comparison (January 24, 2008, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., “Urban Crossroads Trip Generation Memo”) and Focused Traffic Impact Study for The Jefferson Square Shopping Center (May 2008, prepared by Clyde E. Sweet and Associates, “Clyde Sweet Focused Traffic Study”). The Urban Crossroads Trip Generation Memo considered the traffic generated by 16,500 square feet (sf) of retail, 13,928 sf of supermarket uses, a 42,500 sf hardware stores, a 4,500 sf drive thru bank, and a 13,013 sf pharmacy/drug store. The land use evaluated in the Clyde Sweet Focused Traffic Study was 90,441 sf of retail shopping center. The Project is currently proposing to replace most of the retail uses with a hotel. The Project is currently proposed to consist of a 162-room hotel, 15,589 sf of food market and 8,849 sf of retail. It should be noted that the project site also consists of existing 13,013 sf pharmacy/drug store, 7,000 sf of retail and future retail pads of approximately 9,500 sf. The currently proposed site plan is shown on Exhibit 1. This Focused Traffic Assessment has been prepared in response to comments from the City of La Quinta and City of Indio to provide a focused traffic study based on current traffic counts. The study has been prepared consistent with the scoping agreement reviewed and approved by the City Traffic Engineer. As indicated in the scoping agreement, the analysis has been conducted for weekday PM and Saturday mid- day peak hours which would represent the worst-case conditions for the Project traffic. A copy of the approved scoping agreement is included in Attachment A of this letter. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The Project site, including the existing retail, proposed Project and future retail pads is anticipated to generate a net total of 3,445 trip-ends per day on a typical weekday with 295 vehicles per hour (VPH) during the weekday PM peak hour and 446 VPH during the Saturday mid-day peak hour. Ms. Nicole Criste Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc. July 23, 2018 Page 2 of 7 11514-05 Letter The study area intersections have been analyzed using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6 methodology. Peak hour intersection analysis indicates that the study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable level of service (LOS D or better) under Existing (2018) traffic conditions and are anticipated to continue to operate at acceptable LOS under Existing plus Project (E+P) and Existing plus Ambient Growth plus Project (2020) traffic conditions. The parking evaluation demonstrates that adequate parking supply exists to accommodate the build out of Jefferson Square based on a review of the City of La Quinta Municipal Code §9.150.070 Off-Street Parking. The Project provides 361 parking spaces that meet the parking requirement per Municipal Code. In addition, with the implementation of a shared parking approach, the Project can substantially increase the number available parking spaces. While the City of La Quinta Municipal Code requirements indicate no parking surplus, the shared parking analysis approach suggests a minimum parking surplus of 26 spaces. This shared parking surplus is possible due to the complementary nature of the parking demands associated with the hotel and retail uses for the Jefferson Square site. This parking evaluation demonstrates that adequate parking supply exists for the proposed Project. STUDY AREA The study area was determined based on discussions with the City Traffic Engineer and is listed below: ID Intersection Location Jurisdiction 1 Driveway 1 & Fred Waring Drive City of La Quinta 2 Jefferson Street & Fred Waring Drive City of La Quinta/Indio 3 Shopping Center Driveway & Fred Waring Drive City of Indio Exhibit 2 presents the study area intersection analysis locations. INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY Consistent with the City of La Quinta’s Engineering Bulletin #06-13, which establishes standards and policies for traffic studies, analysis has been conducted for each of the following scenarios: x Existing (2018) Conditions x Existing plus Project Conditions x Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Project (EAP) [2020] The study area intersections have been analyzed using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6 methodology utilizing the parameters provided in Attachment 2 of Engineering Bulletin #06-13. The intersections have been analyzed using Synchro software (Version 10). Ms. Nicole Criste Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc. July 23, 2018 Page 3 of 7 11514-05 Letter LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) CRITERIA Per Engineering Bulletin #06-13, the following LOS criteria was utilized for study area intersections: Intersection Type LOS Criteria Signalized Intersection LOS “D” or better All-way Stop Controlled Intersection LOS “D” or better for all critical movements Cross-Street Stop Controlled Intersection LOS “E” or better for the side street EXISTING (2018) CONDITIONS Exhibit 3 illustrates the study area intersections located near the proposed Project and identifies the number of through traffic lanes for existing roadways and intersection traffic controls. The intersection LOS analysis is based on the traffic volumes observed during the peak hour conditions using traffic count data collected in June 2018. Based on discussions with City staff, the following peak hours were selected for analysis: x Weekday PM Peak Hour (peak hour between 2:30 PM and 5:30 PM) x Saturday (Mid-day) Peak Hour (peak hour between 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM) Consistent with Engineering Bulletin #06-13, traffic counts should consider the seasonal population variations within the City of La Quinta. In accordance with the City of La Quinta’s traffic study guidelines, a 15% seasonal variation factor has been applied to the June 2018 traffic count data. The raw manual peak hour turning movement traffic count data sheets are included in Attachment B. The seasonally adjusted traffic counts were compared to the data provided in the City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element Update Traffic Impact Analysis (prepared by Iteris, Inc., May 14, 2012) to ensure volumes are not lower for weekday PM peak hour. Existing (2018) peak hour intersection volumes and estimated daily link traffic are indicated on Exhibit 4. EXISTING (2018) INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS As shown on Table 1, the study intersections currently operate at an acceptable LOS (i.e., LOS “D” or better) during both Weekday PM and Saturday peak hours. Existing (2018) intersection operations analysis worksheets are provided in Attachment C. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION In accordance with Engineering Bulletin #06-13, the Project trip generation rates used for the traffic impact analysis were based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual, Ms. Nicole Criste Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc. July 23, 2018 Page 4 of 7 11514-05 Letter 10th Edition (2017). Internal capture between complementary land uses and the pass-by trips associated with the commercial uses were calculated based on ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition (2017). Trip generation rates are presented on Table 2. As shown on Table 3, the Project site, including the existing retail, proposed Project and future retail pads is anticipated to generate a net total of 3,445 trip-ends per day on a typical weekday with 295 vehicles per hour (VPH) during the weekday PM peak hour and 446 VPH during the Saturday mid-day peak hour. PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION The trip distribution patterns for the proposed Project are graphically depicted on Exhibit 5. The trip distributions have been developed based on past work experience in the vicinity of the Project site and refined to reflect the roadway network and the surrounding uses in the vicinity of the proposed Project as they exist today. The trip distribution was reviewed and approved during the scoping process. PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT The assignment of traffic from the Project to the adjoining roadway system is based upon the Project trip generation, trip distribution, and the arterial highway and local street system improvements that would be in place by the time of initial occupancy of the Project. Based on the identified Project traffic generation and trip distribution patterns, Project peak hour intersection volumes and estimated daily link traffic are indicated on Exhibit 6. EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS Existing plus Project traffic conditions have been analyzed to assess the potential impacts the Project may have on current traffic conditions at each of the study area intersections. Existing Plus Project peak hour intersection volumes and estimated daily link traffic are illustrated on Exhibit 7. E+P INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS As shown on Table 4, the addition of Project traffic to Existing (2018) traffic is not anticipated to result in any deficiencies at the study area intersections. Existing plus Project intersection operations analysis worksheets are provided in Attachment D. EAP (2020) CONDITIONS The Existing plus Ambient Growth plus Project (EAP) conditions analysis determines the traffic impacts based on a comparison of the EAP traffic conditions to Existing conditions (i.e., baseline conditions). To account for background traffic growth, ambient growth of 6.19% over Existing conditions is included for EAP (2020) traffic conditions. The ambient growth rate was calculated based on the growth between Ms. Nicole Criste Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc. July 23, 2018 Page 5 of 7 11514-05 Letter Existing (2018) conditions and the City’s General Plan Buildout Year (2035) traffic volumes from the City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element Update Traffic Impact Analysis (prepared by Iteris, Inc., May 14, 2012). EAP (2020) peak hour intersection volumes and estimated daily link traffic are illustrated on Exhibit 8. EAP (2020) INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS As shown on Table 5, the addition of Project traffic and ambient growth to Existing (2018) traffic is not anticipated to result in any deficiencies at the study area intersections. EAP (2020) intersection operations analysis worksheets are provided in Attachment E. PROJECT ACCESS Access to the Project site will be provided to both Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street via the following driveways: 1. Fred Waring Drive via Driveway 1 (right-in/right-out/left-in only access) 2. Fred Waring Drive via Driveway 2 (right-in/right-out only access) 3. Jefferson Street via Driveway 3 (right-in/right-out only access) 4. Jefferson Street via Driveway 4 (right-in/right-out/left-in only access) The storage length on the existing westbound left turn lane at the driveway on Fred Waring Drive was evaluated based on the nomograph provided in Engineering Bulletin #06-13. As shown in Attachment F, the storage length required based on the left turning and opposing volume is 50 feet. The existing left turn pocket on Fred Waring Drive provides for a storage length of 100 feet and can accommodate anticipated queues. The 27 vehicles per hour (VPH) eastbound right turn volumes on Fred Waring Drive at the Project driveway does not meet the 50 VPH volume threshold for a right-turn deceleration lane. As such a right turn deceleration lane is not recommended at the Project driveway. PARKING EVALUATION The parking requirements for the Project site were estimated based on City of La Quinta Municipal Code §9.150.070 Off-Street Parking Requirements. Table 6 presents a summary of the Jefferson Square parking requirements for the existing and planned hotel and retail uses. The retail uses include existing CVS and retail pads, proposed retail and food market, and future retail pads. According to the City of La Quinta parking requirements, General Retail uses under 100,000 sf GFA requires 1 space per 300 square feet. For Hotels, the City requires 1.1 spaces per room. As shown on Table 6, the total parking requirements for the Jefferson Square project is calculated at 361 spaces. Table 7 presents a summary comparing the City of La Quinta parking requirements and the total shared parking provided by the Ms. Nicole Criste Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc. July 23, 2018 Page 6 of 7 11514-05 Letter Project. Table 7 indicates an overall parking requirement of 361 spaces. The Project proposes to provide 361 parking spaces, suggesting an adequate overall parking, but no parking surplus. SHARED PARKING As some of the proposed uses have parking demands that peak during different times of the day, there is an opportunity for these uses to “share” parking with other proposed uses. The Urban Land Institute (ULI) shared parking methodology estimates peak parking demand by applying hourly adjustment factors. The planned Jefferson Square hotel and retail land uses are complementary and, therefore, provide the opportunity to share parking spaces between land uses. Shared parking is the use of a single parking space to serve two or more individual land uses without conflict or encroachment as described in ULI’s Shared Parking, 2nd Edition 2005. For example, the parking supply needed for retail uses during the mid-day and evening hours could be utilized by the hotel use in the night and early morning hours when retail use demand is low. PARKING UTILIZATION Parking Utilization represents the number of parking spaces required (parking demand) expressed as a percentage of the number of parking spaces provided. According the Shared Parking report published by the Urban Land Institute, during typical weekday conditions, the parking demand for a hotel is rarely less than 65% of the available parking spaces. As expected though for a hotel land use, parking utilization approaches 100% during the hours of 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. The parking demand for Retail peaks during the daytime of 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., but rarely exceeds 35% at all other hours of the day. Table 8 presents the average weekday shared parking rates per the Shared Parking report published by ULI. This table identifies the hourly weekday parking demands expressed as a percentage of available parking spaces occupied between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 12:00 a.m. Table 9 describes the average weekday shared parking utilization for each land use within the Project. The shared parking utilization estimates shown on Table 9 are calculated by applying shared parking rates from Table 8 with the number of required parking spaces for each land use. The results shown on Table 9 provide hourly estimates of actual shared parking utilization for the Project. Table 9 presents the expected number of available parking spaces occupied between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. The shared parking approach suggests a minimum parking surplus of 36 spaces during peak weekday activities from 6 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. During peak hotel parking demands between the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., the shared parking analysis indicates a parking surplus ranging from 36 to 189 spaces. This translates into an overall Project parking utilization (number of parking spaces required expressed as a percentage of the number of parking spaces provided) ranging from 48% to 90%. Similarly, the average weekend shared parking rates and shared parking utilization are shown in Tables 10 and 11, respectively. The shared parking approach suggests a minimum parking surplus of 28 spaces during peak weekend activities from 2 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. As shown in Table 11, the parking surplus during the weekend ranges from 28 to 189 spaces. This translates into an overall Project parking utilization Ms. Nicole Criste Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc. July 23, 2018 Page 7 of 7 11514-05 Letter (number of parking spaces required expressed as a percentage of the number of parking spaces provided) ranging from 48% to 92%. Based on this parking analysis, the Project as designed provides adequate parking to address average and peak parking requirements. If you have any questions, please contact me directly at (949) 336-5992. Respectfully submitted, URBAN CROSSROADS, INC. Pranesh Tarikere, PE Senior Engineer Jefferson Square Focused Traffic Impact Analysis EXHIBIT 1: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN 11514 - siteplan.dwg URBAN CROSSROADS AMG H31N3:) E)NlddOHS L -iS NOSH3113f. f I., T' H H ril J.Ji i mul Ll ~ 3 .[..j Y-#an i Y CE Z ■LJ :i ■LJ i`�o 9 p a3c O)) v �► �(L9)VL Lan f Q � Q a r N J d O W N7 �(O > 0. Z N p La Cfl00 n J WLJ N n ao a �ibbl)996 W O a [n V N o La a 3 + v �(LZ9)9L9 �091)80Z z G �l9)b8 z (bS9)OZOI— v N ao Y Q a 0 (6£l)991� - M M W N V d W N 0 00 m N f0 J J a as o v v a > a '� 3 c �N ■ n n o 3 Cor- i L a o v O O tr O� �N M W © L LL IS NOSH3333f I �l �f - O I..I. .1� 41; :J' IT T' 4r. 0 ■ wJ N CW C J \0 _U LL LL Q } J Z O U W 0 a ifl H m s X W L � © S•O 15 NOSN3AA3f - 74, JF JL Ll _ - r If 41 M C �(( )) �(0)0 1 L � L7 �O M M c7f [n g V N i(0)0 -(0)0 L L f-(0)0 (0)0-# (6E)9Z- R v o (E)Z� M o N ctf 0 3 •c 03 0 a LCoco Nw r z0 194 c 0: LcIA o �V P s " : ` .. km � �a 4i3c 5 3 �SE9�06 C CL + L9 VL L � N 1 coo OGO M � in ao v °' �ibbl)996 c •- [n co cn 2 f(LZ9)9L9 3 v + f—(091)80Z (l9)b8—# (E69)9bOl— m o ao �Ebl)891� cr � M N N O N Lo 04Coo� ctf 0 (00 a o' cDao 35 v a L —(EE)LZ N .O.A) O� W r W O H u W N y w O H O Z O 0 Q O C x Y � w d a rn w J a � W a> � w T- o � , o c > o, 4 3 c ClM c 3 �SL996 + c lL 8L 1 L N co AN �O M OD c7. O` co P� °' -It N ii£S6)9L6 o ` a m o 3 I, N f(999)SU 'aL f-(OLOLZZ (99)68-# (b£L)8011— �6S1)8L1� �: v o N ,n o ,n NCIDN r-ao 3 cv" O 3 ON a L -0,08Z NIA lt)N .O.A) O� 7 r O © E 6L '1S NOSH3333f - it LU Ll I..I. :1; 1:1' r' T' �— - ...� Na .. N '1 z 0 c L'rIA 194 �V Table1 Traffic Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Acceptable # Intersection Control 3 LTRLTRLTRLTRPM SATPMSAT LOS 1Dwy.1&FredWaringDr. CSS 00100003013015.911.1C B E 2 JeffersonSt.&FredWaringDr. TS 23123123123025.821.1C C D 3 ShoppingCenterDwy.&FredWaringDr. TS 101000030130 9.0 8.6 AA D 1 Whenarightturnisdesignated,thelanecaneitherbestripedorunstriped.Tofunctionasarightturnlanetheremustbesufficientwidthforright turningvehiclestotraveloutsidethethroughlanes. 2 PertheHighwayCapacityManual6thEdition,overallaverageintersectiondelayandlevelofserviceareshownforintersectionswithatrafficsignalorallͲwaystopcontrol. Forintersectionswithcrossstreetstopcontrol,thedelayandlevelofservicefortheworstindividualmovement(ormovementssharingasinglelane)areshown. 3 CSS=CrossͲstreetStop;TS=TrafficSignal L=Left;T=Through;R=Right IntersectionAnalysisforExisting(2018)Conditions IntersectionApproachLanes1 Delay2 LOS (secs.) Table2 ITELU PMPeakHour SATPeakHour LandUse1 Code Units2 In Out Total In Out Total Hotel 310 RM 0.31 0.29 0.60 0.40 0.32 0.72 8.36 ShoppingCenter(AverageRate) 820 TSF 1.83 1.98 3.81 2.34 2.16 4.50 37.75 ShoppingCenter(Equation)3 820 TSF 2.62 2.83 5.45 8.47 7.81 16.28 60.35 Supermarket 850 TSF 4.71 4.53 9.24 5.27 5.07 10.34 106.78 Pharmacy/DrugstorewithDriveͲThrough 881 TSF 5.15 5.14 10.29 4.29 4.46 8.75 109.16 1TripGenerationSource:InstituteofTransportationEngineers(ITE),TripGenerationManual,10thEdition(2017). 2TSF=ThousandSquareFeet;RM=Rooms 3RatescalculatedbasedonITEequationsforLUC820for98,803sfShoppingCenter ProjectTripGenerationRates Daily Table3 LandUse Quantity Units 2 In Out Total In Out Total Hotel 162 RM 50 48 98 65 51 116 1,354 Ͳ9 Ͳ4 Ͳ13 Ͳ10 Ͳ4 Ͳ14 Ͳ180 Retail 8.849TSF161834211940334 Ͳ6 Ͳ6 Ͳ12 Ͳ5 Ͳ5 Ͳ10 Ͳ114 FoodMarket 15.589 TSF 73 71 144 82 79 161 1,665 Ͳ4 Ͳ9 Ͳ13 Ͳ4 Ͳ10 Ͳ14 Ͳ150 Ͳ26 Ͳ26 Ͳ53000Ͳ599 94 92 185 149 130 279 2,310 Retail 7.000TSF131427161531264 Ͳ5 Ͳ5 Ͳ10 Ͳ4 Ͳ4 Ͳ8 Ͳ90 Pharmacy/DrugstorewithDriveͲThrough 13.013 TSF 67 67 134 56 58 114 1,420 Ͳ33 Ͳ33 Ͳ66000Ͳ696 42 43 86 68 69 137 898 Retail 9.500TSF171936222143359 Ͳ6 Ͳ6 Ͳ12 Ͳ6 Ͳ6 Ͳ12 Ͳ122 11 13 24 16 15 31 237 147 148 295 233 214 446 3,445 1TripGenerationSource:InstituteofTransportationEngineers(ITE),TripGenerationManual,10thEdition(2017). 2TSF=ThousandSquareFeet;RM=Rooms 3InternalcapturecalculatedfromNCHRP684InternalTripCaptureEstimationTool. ProjectTripGenerationSummary PMPeakHour Daily ProposedProject SATPeakHour TotalSiteTrips ExistingBuildings FutureRetailPads PassͲbyReduction(PM/Daily:49%) PassͲbyReduction(PM/Daily:34%,SAT:26%) FutureRetailPadsSubͲTotal ExistingRetailSubͲTotal InternalCapture 3 : InternalCapture 3 : PassͲbyReduction(PM/Daily:34%,SAT:26%) PassͲbyReduction(PM/Daily:36%) PassͲbyReduction(PM/Daily:34%,SAT:26%) ProposedProjectSubͲTotal Table4 Traffic Acceptable # Intersection Control 2 PM SAT PM SAT PM SAT PM SAT LOS 1Dwy.1&FredWaringDr. CSS 15.9 11.1 C B 17.1 11.8 C B E 2 JeffersonSt.&FredWaringDr. TS 25.8 21.1 C C 26.3 21.6 C C D 3 ShoppingCenterDwy.&FredWaringDr. TS 9.0 8.6 A A 9.0 8.6 A A D 1 PertheHighwayCapacityManual6thEdition,overallaverageintersectiondelayandlevelofserviceareshownforintersectionswithatrafficsigna Forintersectionswithcrossstreetstopcontrol,thedelayandlevelofservicefortheworstindividualmovement(ormovementssharingasinglela 2 CSS=CrossͲstreetStop;TS=TrafficSignal IntersectionAnalysisforE+PConditions Existing(2018) E+P Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS (secs.) (secs.) Table5 Traffic Acceptable # Intersection Control 2 PM SAT PM SAT PM SAT PM SAT LOS 1Dwy.1&FredWaringDr. CSS 15.9 11.1 C B 18.3 12.0 C B E 2 JeffersonSt.&FredWaringDr. TS 25.8 21.1 C C 27.8 22.1 C C D 3 ShoppingCenterDwy.&FredWaringDr. TS 9.0 8.6 A A 9.0 8.6 A A D 1 PertheHighwayCapacityManual6thEdition,overallaverageintersectiondelayandlevelofserviceareshownforintersectionswithatrafficsigna Forintersectionswithcrossstreetstopcontrol,thedelayandlevelofservicefortheworstindividualmovement(ormovementssharingasinglela 2 CSS=CrossͲstreetStop;TS=TrafficSignal IntersectionAnalysisforEAP(2020)Conditions Existing(2018) EAP(2020) Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS (secs.) (secs.) Table6 Quantity ParkingRate1 Required ParkingStalls Totals Hotel Hotel 162RMS 1.1 179 179 CVS 13,013sf 1per300sf 44 ExistingRetailPad 7,000sf 1per300sf 24 ProposedRetail 8,849sf 1per300sf 30 FoodMarket 15,589sf 1per300sf 52 FutureRetailPads 9,500sf 1per300sf 32 361 2MinimumOffͲstreetParkingRatesfor"Generalretailusesunder100,000sfGFA"hasbeenutilized JeffersonSquareParkingRequirements Use Retail2 182 TotalParkingRequirement: 1BasedontheLaQuintaMunicipalCode§9.150.070OffͲStreetParkingRequirements U:\UcJobs\_11100-11500\_11500\11514\Excel\11514-06 Letter Table7 LandUse Parking Requirments1 SharedParking Provided2 Variance Hotel179 Commercial 182 Total 361 361 0 JeffersonSquareParkingSummary 1BasedontheLaQuintaMunicipalCode§9.150.070OffͲStreetParkingRequirements ²Source:March23,2018JeffersonSquareSitePlanpreparedbyPARTI. 361 0 U:\UcJobs\_11100-11500\_11500\11514\Excel\11514-06 Letter Table 8Landuse6AM7AM8AM9AM10AM11AM12PM1PM2PM3PM4PM5PM6PM7PM8PM9PM10PM11PM12AMHotel 95% 95% 90% 80% 70% 70% 65% 65% 70% 70% 75% 80% 85% 85% 90% 95% 95% 100% 100%Retail 1% 5% 15% 35% 65% 85% 95% 100% 95% 90% 90% 95% 95% 95% 80% 50% 30% 10% 0%WeekdaySharedParkingRates11BasedonparkingutilizationratesbylandusetypeaccordingtotheUrbanLandInstitute(ULI)SharedParkingSecondEdition.U:\UcJobs\_11100-11500\_11500\11514\Excel\11514-06 Letter Table 9LanduseRequiredSpaces16AM7AM8AM9AM10AM11AM12PM1PM2PM3PM4PM5PM6PM7PM8PM9PM10PM11PM12AMHotel 179 170 170 161 143 125 125 116 116 125 125 134 143 152 152 161 170 170 179 179Retail 182 2 9 27 64 118 155 173 182 173 164 164 173 173 173 146 91 55 18 0172 179 188 207 244 280 289 298 298 289 298 316 325 325 307 261 225 197 179189 182 173 154 117 81 72 63 63 72 63 45 36 36 54 100 136 164 18248% 50% 52% 57% 67% 78% 80% 83% 83% 80% 83% 88% 90% 90% 85% 72% 62% 55% 50%WeekdaySharedParkingUtilizationParkingDemand2ParkingSurplus3ParkingUtilization41BasedontheLaQuintaMunicipalCode§9.150.070OffͲStreetParkingRequirements2EstimatedhourlyparkingdemandbylandusetypeaccordingtoUrbanLandInstitute(ULI)SharedParkingSecondEditition.3Estimatehourlyparkingsurplus(ParkingRequirementsͲParkingDemand)forProjectsite.4Estimatedhourlyparkingutlization(percentageofspacesoccupied).U:\UcJobs\_11100-11500\_11500\11514\Excel\11514-06 Letter Table 10Landuse6AM7AM8AM9AM10AM11AM12PM1PM2PM3PM4PM5PM6PM7PM8PM9PM10PM11PM12AMHotel 95% 95% 90% 80% 70% 70% 65% 65% 70% 70% 75% 80% 85% 85% 90% 95% 95% 100% 100%Retail 1% 5% 10% 30% 50% 65% 80% 90% 100% 100% 95% 90% 80% 75% 65% 50% 35% 15% 0%WeekendSharedParkingRates11BasedonparkingutilizationratesbylandusetypeaccordingtotheUrbanLandInstitute(ULI)SharedParkingSecondEdition.U:\UcJobs\_11100-11500\_11500\11514\Excel\11514-06 Letter Table 11LanduseRequiredSpaces16AM7AM8AM9AM10AM11AM12PM1PM2PM3PM4PM5PM6PM7PM8PM9PM10PM11PM12AMHotel 179 170 170 161 143 125 125 116 116 125 125 134 143 152 152 161 170 170 179 179Retail 208 2 10 21 62 104 135 166 187 208 208 198 187 166 156 135 104 73 31 0172 180 182 206 229 261 283 304 333 333 332 330 319 308 296 274 243 210 179189 181 179 155 132 101 78 57 28 28 29 31 42 53 65 87 118 151 18248% 50% 50% 57% 64% 72% 78% 84% 92% 92% 92% 92% 88% 85% 82% 76% 67% 58% 50%WeekendSharedParkingUtilizationParkingDemand2ParkingSurplus3ParkingUtilization41BasedontheLaQuintaMunicipalCode§9.150.070OffͲStreetParkingRequirements2EstimatedhourlyparkingdemandbylandusetypeaccordingtoUrbanLandInstitute(ULI)SharedParkingSecondEditition.3Estimatehourlyparkingsurplus(ParkingRequirementsͲParkingDemand)forProjectsite.4Estimatedhourlyparkingutlization(percentageofspacesoccupied).U:\UcJobs\_11100-11500\_11500\11514\Excel\11514-06 Letter ATTACHMENT 6Renderings of Hotel Courtyard$77$&+0(17 Renderings of interior food marketATTACHMENT 7$77$&+0(17 $77$&+0(17 (c) Any use or activity which would generate smoke or water vapor or which would attract large concentrations of birds, or which may otherwise affect safe air navigation within the area. (Such uses include landscaping utilizing water features, aquaculture, composting operations, production of cereal grains, sunflower, and row crops, trash transfer stations that are open on one or more sides, recycling centers containing putrescible wastes, construction and demolition debris facilities, fly ash disposal, and incinerators.) (d) Any use which would generate electrical interference that may be detrimental to the operation of aircraft and/or aircraft instrumentation. 3. The attached notice shall be provided to all potential purchasers of the project site, lessees, concessionaries, and long-term tenants (over 30 days). 4. Any new detention basin(s) on the site shall be designed so as to provide for a maximum 48-hour detention period following the conclusion of the storm event for the design storm (may be less, but not more), and to remain totally dry between rainfalls. Vegetation in and around the detention basin(s) that would provide food or cover for bird species that would be incompatible with airport operations shall not be utilized in project landscaping. If you have any questions, please contact Paul Rull, ALUC Urban Regional Planner IV, at (951) 955-6893 or John Guerin, ALUC Principal Planner, at (951) 955-0982. Sincerely, RIVERSIDE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION Simon A. Housman, ALUC Director Attachments: Notice of Airport in Vicinity cc: Caleb Ro, CCD Hotels and Resorts, LLC—Rancho Mirage (applicant/local representative) Paul Mercer, CCD Hotels and Resorts, LLC — Redding (fee -payer) Regency Marinita La Quinta (San Antonio) (listed property owner) PARTI (architect) (London) Ann Goodwyn, Airport Manager, Bermuda Dunes Executive Airport ALUC Case File Y:\AIRPORT CASE FILES\Bermuda Dunes\ZAP1 074BD1 8\ZAP1 074BD1 8.LTR.doc 2 $77$&+0(17 T N A N S/ T A C E N C Y MEMBERS. Desert Hot Springs Palm Springs Cathedral City Rancho Mirage Palm Desert Indian Wells La Quinta Indio Coachella Riverside County A Public Agency Cheri Flores, Senior Planner Page Two o Limit the use of elements that impede pedestrian movement such as meandering sidewalks, walled communities, and expansive parking lots. o Eliminate barriers to pedestrian activities, including sound walls, berms, fences, and landscaping which obstructs pedestrian access or visibility. Gates should be provided at restricted areas to provided access to those using transit services. o Pedestrian pathways should be paved to ensure that they are accessible to everyone. Accessible circulation and routes should include curb cuts, ramps, visual guides and railing where necessary. ADA compliant ramps should be placed at each corner of an intersection. o A minimum horizontal clearance of 48 inches (preferable 60 inches) should be maintained along the entire pathway. o A vertical clearance of 84 inches (preferable 96 inches) should also be maintained along the pathway. Should you have questions or concerns regarding this letter, please contact me at 760-343-3456, ext. 1603. Sincerel Petke Transit Communications Service Specialist cc: Lauren Skiver, CEO/General Manager Stephanie Buriel, Chief of Administration 32-505 Harry Oliver Trail, Thousand Palms, California 92276 Phone 760-343-3456 Fax 760-343-7986 www.sunline.org 14-IID A century of semice. September 5, 2018 Ms. Cheri Flores Senior Planner Design & Development Department City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 www.iid.com Since 1911 SUBJECT: NOI to Adopt a MND for the Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment & Site Development Permit in La Quinta, CA Dear Ms. Flores: On August 15, 2018 the Imperial Irrigation District received from City of La Quinta Design & Development Department, the Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment & Site Development Permit. In 2004, the Jefferson Square Specific Plan was approved for mixed -commercial use on 10.7 acres of land and consisted of seven building areas. Currently, the applicant, CCD Hotel & Resorts, LLC; is proposing an amendment that would result in the repurposing an existing store involving retrofitting the building. Furthermore, the applicant is proposing construction of a three-story, 160- room hotel building, associated facilities and retail shops in the southern portion of the site located at the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street in La Quinta, CA. A Site Development Permit is also being requested for the landscaping and architectural design of the hotel and retail components of the project. The Imperial Irrigation District has reviewed the information and has the following comments: IID will not begin any engineering or estimate costs to provide electrical service for the project until the owner submits an application, detailed loading information, project schedule and estimated in-service date. The IID customer project application is available at t p-Mww_iid.comihomelshowdocument?id=12923. 2. Once the applicant provides the district with the required information, IID can carry out a thorough assessment to determine the specific requirements to supply electrical service to the project including but not limited to new backbone distribution line extensions and reconfigurations to existing IID facilities. Likewise, IID will determine the availability of temporary construction power from existing power lines based on construction schedules and or phasing. 3. For additional information regarding electrical service for the project, the applicant should be advised to contact the IID Energy - La Quinta Division Customer Operations, 81-600 Avenue 58 La Quinta, CA 92253, at (760) 398-5841 and speak with the area's project manager, Travis Maston, for guidance and to initiate the customer service application IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT • P.O_ BOX 937 • IMPERIAL, CA 92251 Cheri Flores September 5, 2018 Page 2 process. Mr. Maston can also be reached (760) 398-5871 or by email at tnmaston IID.com. 4. It is important to note that IID's policy is to extend its electrical facilities only to those developments that have obtained the approval of a city or county planning commission and such other governmental authority or decision -making body having jurisdiction over said developments. 5. The applicant will be required to provide rights -of -way and easements for any power line extensions needed to serve the project. 6. Line extensions to serve the project will be made in accordance with IID Regulations; No.2 (htto.lIwww.iid.comThorne/showdocument?id=2540), No. 13 (tit :/r+ wv.iid.com/home/showdocument?ld=25 3), No. 15 (h[W--LIWWw-ijd.com/home/showdocument?id=2555) and No.20 (http'fl w.iid_corm/home/�hp document?id=2660. 7. Any construction or operation on IID property or within its existing and proposed right of way or easements including but not limited to: surface improvements such as proposed new streets, driveways, parking lots, landscape; and all water, sewer, storm water, or any other above ground or underground utilities; will require an encroachment permit, or encroachment agreement (depending on the circumstances). A copy of the IID encroachment permit application and instructions for its completion are available at http.11www.iid.com/departments/real-estate. The IID Real Estate Section should be contacted at (760) 339-9239 for additional information regarding encroachment permits or agreements. 8. Relocation of existing IID facilities to accommodate the project and/or to accommodate street widening improvements imposed by the City will be deemed developer -driven and all costs, as well as securing of rights of way and easements for relocated facilities, shall be borne by the applicant. 9. Any new, relocated, modified or reconstructed IID facilities required for and by the project (which can include but is not limited to electrical utility substations, electrical transmission and distribution lines, etc.) need to be included as part of the project's CEQA and/or NEPA documentation, environmental impact analysis and mitigation. Failure to do so will result in postponement of any construction and/or modification of IID facilities until such time as the environmental documentation is amended and environmental impacts are fully mitigated. Any mitigation necessary as a result of the construction, relocation and/or upgrade of IID facilities is the responsibility of the project proponent. 10. Dividing a project into two or more pieces and evaluating each piece in a separate environmental document (Piecemealing or Segmenting), rather than evaluating the whole of the project in one environmental document, is explicitly forbidden by CEQA, because dividing a project into a number of pieces would allow a Lead Agency to minimize the apparent environmental impacts of a project by evaluating individual pieces separately, each of which may have a less -than -significant impact on the environment, but which Cheri Flores September 5, 2018 Page 3 together may result in a significant impact. Segmenting a project may also hinder developing comprehensive mitigation strategies. In general, if an activity or facility (e.g. offsite electrical infrastructure) is necessary for the operation of a project, or necessary to achieve the project objectives, or a reasonably foreseeable consequence of approving the project, then it should be considered an integral project component that should be analyzed within the environmental analysis. The project description should include all project components, including those that will have to be approved by responsible agencies. The State CEQA Guidelines define a project under CEQA as "the whole of the action" that may result either directly or indirectly in physical changes to the environment. This broad definition is intended to provide the maximum protection of the environment. CEQA case law has established general principles on project segmentation for different project types. For a project requiring construction of offsite infrastructure, the offsite infrastructure must be included in the project description. See San Joaquin RaptorlWildlife Rescue Center v. County of Stanislaus (1994) 27 Cal.App. 4th 713. 11. Applicant should be advised that landscaping can be dangerous if items are planted too close to IID's electrical equipment. In the event of an outage, or equipment failure, it is vital that IID personnel have immediate and safe access to its equipment to make the needed repairs. For public safety, and that of the electrical workers, it is important to adhere to standards that limit landscaping around electrical facilities. IID landscaping guidelines are available at.http://www.iid.com/eneEgy/safety/landscape-quidelines. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (760) 482-3609 or at dvargas@iid.com. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this matter. Res tfully, Z ❑ Wald Vargas Compliance Administrator II Kevin Kelley — General Manager Mike Pacheco — Manager, Water Dept, Enrique B. Martinez— Manager, Energy Dept„ Jamie Asbury — Deputy Manager, Energy Dept., Operations Vance Taylor —Asst. General Counsel Robert Laurie —Asst. General Counsel Enrique De Leon — Asst. Mgr., Energy Dept., Distr., Planning, Eng. & Customer Service Michael P. Kemp — Superintendent, Regulatory & Environmental Compliance Randy Gray — ROW Agent II, Real Estate CITY OF INDIO xx 100 CIVIC CENTER MALL x INDIO, CA 92201 PHONE (760) 391-4120 x FAX (760) 391-4027 Page 1 of 2 September 14, 2018 Development Services Department City of La Quinta Design & Development Department Attn: Cheri Flores, Senior Planner 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Environmental Initial Study for Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment & Site Development Permit. Dear Cheri Flores, Thank you for providing the City of Indio the opportunity to review and comment on the Environmental Initial Study of the Jefferson Square Specific Plan Amendment & Site Development Permit. The proposed project will be located on the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. It is our understanding that the proposed project consists of a food market, assorted retail and service-oriented shop, and a 160 room hotel. After reviewing the information provided, comments pertaining to the following sections of the Environmental Initial Study are being provided for consideration: I. Aesthetics Currently the Neighborhood Commercial (CN) zoning allows for a maximum 2 stories buildings at a height of 35 feet. The development of the project would result in the construction of a 3 stories hotel at 38 feet high exceeding the maximum development standard of the zoning. It is requested that Visualization Views be incorporate into the Environmental Notice of Intent from the east side of the project to ensure neighboring Indio residents will not have their views negatively impacted by the proposed hotel. CITY OF INDIO xx 100 CIVIC CENTER MALL x INDIO, CA 92201 PHONE (760) 391-4120 x FAX (760) 391-4027 Page 2 of 2 X. Land Use and Planning The Project site is located in an area of the City designated for Neighborhood Commercial (CN) which currently prohibits hotels and motels. The proposed Amendment to the Specific Plan would allow a 160 room hotel in the Neighborhood Commercial zone, due to its “relatively small size …and its location in close proximity to major roadways and the interstate”. It is requested that further analysis be made based on previous, similarly entitled hotel projects in the city to ensure that the proposed use is appropriate at this location and will not be a detriment to the quality of life experienced by the surrounding residents in La Quinta and Indio. The City’s, Traffic Engineer has reviewed the Traffic Assessment and Parking Evaluation prepared by Urban Crossroads, and has no comments on the Project. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Should you have any questions please feel free to contact me at (760) 391-4016 or at ggomez@indio.org. Thanks, Gustavo Gomez Planning Technician I