2022 04 12 PCPLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page 1 of 5 APRIL 12, 2022
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER
78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, APRIL 12, 2022, AT 5:00 P.M.
****************************
SPECIAL NOTICE
Teleconferencing and Telephonic Accessibility In Effect
Pursuant to Executive Orders N-25-20 and N-08-21 executed by the Governor of
California, and subsequently Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361, 2021), enacted in response
to the state of emergency relating to novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)
and enabling teleconferencing accommodations by suspending or waiving specified
provisions in the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code § 54950 et seq.), members
of the public, Planning Commission, the City Attorney, City Staff, and City
Consultants may participate in this meeting by teleconference.
Members of the public may listen to this meeting by tuning-in live via
http://laquinta.12milesout.com/video/live.
Members of the public wanting to address the Planning Commission, either for
a specific agenda item or matters not on the agenda, are requested to follow the
instructions listed below:
Written public comments – can be provided in-person during the meeting or
emailed to the Planning Commission Secretary, Tania Flores, at
TFlores@LaQuintaCA.Gov, preferably before 3:00 p.m. on the day of the
meeting, and will be distributed to the Planning Commission and incorporated into
the agenda packet and public record of the meeting, but will not be read during the
meeting unless, upon the request of the Chairperson, a brief summary of any public
comment is asked to be read, to the extent that the Commission Secretary can
accommodate such request.
Planning Commission agendas and
staff reports are now available on the
City’s web page: www.LaQuintaCA.Gov
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page 2 of 5 APRIL 12, 2022
The email subject line should clearly state “Written Comments” and should include
the following:
1) Full Name 4) Public Comment or Agenda Item Number
2) City of Residence 5) Subject
3) Phone Number 6) Written Comments
***** TELECONFERENCE PROCEDURES *****
Verbal Public Comment via Teleconference – members of the public may
attend and participate in the meeting by teleconference via Zoom and use
the “raise your hand” feature when public comments are prompted by the
Chairperson; the City will facilitate the ability for a member of the public to be
audible to the Planning Commission and general public and allow him/her/they to
speak on the item(s) requested. Please note – members of the public must unmute
themselves when prompted upon being recognized by the Chairperson, in order to
become audible to the Planning Commission and the public. Only one person may
speak at a time and only after being recognized by the Chairperson.
Zoom Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/82853067939
Meeting ID: 828 5306 7939
Or by phone: (253) 215 – 8782
Email communications for public comments related to items on the agenda, or for
general public comment, should be submitted to the City at the email address listed
above prior to the commencement of the meeting. To accommodate the public,
every effort will be made to review emails received by the City during the course of
the meeting. The Chairperson will endeavor to take a brief pause before action is
taken on any agenda item to allow the Commission Secretary to review emails and
share any public comments received during the meeting. All emails received by the
City, at the email address above, until the adjournment of the meeting, will be
included within the public record relating to the meeting.
ADDITIONAL SPECIAL NOTICE FOR CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1:
In accordance with State law and City rules of procedure for conducting public
meetings, the Chair of the Planning Commission will preside over the continued
public hearing for Public Hearing Item No. 1 relating to the proposed Coral Mountain
Resort. Subject to any decisions issued by the Chair at the meeting, all members of
the public are welcome to speak during this continued public hearing on April 12,
2022; provided, however, that members of the public who previously spoke or
previously submitted written comments, or both, during the public hearing for this
item on March 22, 2022, are requested to address only matters relating to the
supplemental materials requested by the Commission at the March 22, 2022
meeting, to be provided to the Commission prior to the April 12, 2022 meeting. All
verbal and written comments submitted prior to or during the public hearing for this
item on March 22, 2022, are in the administrative record and are already available
for the Commission to review.
****************************
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page 3 of 5 APRIL 12, 2022
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL: Commissioners Caldwell, Currie, Hassett, McCune, Proctor, Tyerman
and Chairperson Nieto
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 by providing written public comments either
in-person or via email as indicated above; or provide verbal public comments
either in-person or via teleconference by joining the meeting virtually at
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/82853067939 and use the “raise your hand”
feature when prompted by the Chairperson or Commission Secretary. Members of
the public attending the meeting in-person are requested to complete a “Request
to Speak” form and submit to the Commission Secretary. Please limit your
comments to three (3) minutes (or approximately 350 words). 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 the Brown Act [Government Code § 54954.2(b)].
CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
ANNOUNCEMENTS, PRESENTATIONS AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - NONE
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTE: Consent Calendar items are routine in nature and can be approved by one motion.
PAGE
1. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 8, 2022 6
BUSINESS SESSION - NONE
STUDY SESSION – NONE
PUBLIC HEARINGS
For all Public Hearings on the agenda, any person may provide public comments in
support or opposition of a project(s). If you challenge a project(s) in court, you
may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public
hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to the public
hearing.
ADDITIONAL SPECIAL NOTICE FOR CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1:
In accordance with State law and City rules of procedure for conducting public
meetings, the Chair of the Planning Commission will preside over the continued
public hearing for Public Hearing Item No. 1 relating to the proposed Coral Mountain
Resort. Subject to any decisions issued by the Chair at the meeting, all members of
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page 4 of 5 APRIL 12, 2022
the public are welcome to speak during this continued public hearing on April 12,
2022; provided, however, that members of the public who previously spoke or
previously submitted written comments, or both, during the public hearing for this
item on March 22, 2022, are requested to address only matters relating to the
supplemental materials requested by the Commission at the March 22, 2022
meeting, to be provided to the Commission prior to the April 12, 2022 meeting. All
verbal and written comments submitted prior to or during the public hearing for this
item on March 22, 2022, are in the administrative record and are already available
for the Commission to review.
A person may submit written comments either in-person or via email at
TFlores@LaQuintaCA.Gov; or provide verbal comments during the public hearing
either in-person or via teleconference by joining the meeting virtually at
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/82853067939 and use the “raise your hand”
feature when prompted by the Chairperson. Members of the public attending the
meeting in-person are requested to complete a “Request to Speak” form and
submit it to the Commission Secretary prior to consideration of the item. Please
limit your comments to three (3) minutes (or approximately 350 words).
PAGE
1.CONTINUED FROM MARCH 22, 2022: ADOPT RESOLUTIONS TO
RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT 2019-0010, AND APPROVE SPECIFIC PLAN 2019-0003
(AMENDMENT V TO ANDALUSIA SPECIFIC PLAN), GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT 2019-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2019-0004, SPECIFIC
PLAN 2020-0002, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2019-0005,
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0002 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT 2021-0001; CEQA: CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH #2021020310);
LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 58, NORTH OF AVENUE 60 AND
EAST AND WEST OF MADISON STREET
12
2. ADOPT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
2021-0008 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005 FOR 50
RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON 26.12 ACRES; CEQA: DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THE PROJECT IS
CONSISTENT WITH EA 2003-483; LOCATION: NORTH OF AVENUE
60, EAST OF MADISON STREET, AND WEST OF MONROE STREET
141
REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS – NONE
STAFF ITEMS - NONE
COMMISSIONERS’ ITEMS – NONE
ADJOURNMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page 5 of 5 APRIL 12, 2022
****************************
The next regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission will be held on
April 26, 2022, commencing at 5:00 p.m. with the Call to Order, at the City Hall
Council Chamber, 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California.
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Tania Flores, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby declare that the foregoing
Agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of April 12, 2022, was
posted on the City’s website, near the entrance to the Council Chamber at 78495
Calle Tampico, and the bulletin boards at the Stater Brothers Supermarket at 78630
Highway 111, and the La Quinta Cove Post Office at 51321 Avenida Bermudas, on
April 7, 2022.
DATED: April 7, 2022
TANIA FLORES, Planning 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 (760) 777-7023, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the
meeting and accommodations will be made.
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 (760) 777-7023. 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 ten (10) copies of all documents, exhibits,
etc., must be supplied to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution. It is
requested that this takes 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 Page 1 of 6 FEBRUARY 8, 2022
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2022
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was called to order at 5:03
p.m. by Chairperson Nieto.
This meeting provided teleconferencing accessibility pursuant to Executive Orders
N-60-20 and N-08-21 executed by the Governor of California, and subsequently
Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361, 2021), enacted in response to the state of emergency
relating to novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and enabling
teleconferencing accommodations by suspending or waiving specified provisions in
the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code § 54950 et seq.).
PRESENT: Commissioners Caldwell, Currie, Hassett, McCune, Proctor,
Tyerman, and Chairperson Nieto
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Design & Development Director Danny Castro, Public Works
Director/City Engineer Bryan McKinney, Planning Manager Cheri
L. Flores, Senior Planner Carlos Flores, Associate Planner Siji
Fernandez, Commission Secretary Tania Flores, Assistant City
Attorney Travis Van Ligten
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Tyerman led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA – None.
CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Hassett/Proctor to
confirm the agenda as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, PRESENTATIONS, AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATION – None.
6
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 1
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 of 6 FEBRUARY 8, 2022
CONSENT CALENDAR
1.ADOPT A RESOLUTION FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED STREET
RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION OF A 150-SQUARE-FOOT PORTION OF
AVENIDA MORALES FRONTING 51780 AVENIDA MORALES IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN; CEQA: EXEMPT
PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15301 (c), EXISTING
FACILITIES [PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-005]
MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Currie/Tyerman
to approve the Consent Calendar, as presented, with Item No. 1 adopting Planning
Commission Resolution No. 2022-005. Motion passed unanimously.
BUSINESS SESSION – None.
STUDY SESSION – None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 25, 2022: CONSIDER REQUEST FOR
CONTINUANCE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
2021-0001 (TTM 38083) FOR 37 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON 24.46 ACRES
WITHIN THE GRIFFIN RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AREA; CEQA: THE
DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS PREPARED AN
ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION (EA2006-577) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15164 OF THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT; LOCATION: SOUTH
SIDE OF AVENUE 54 BETWEEN MADISON STREET AND MONROE
STREET
DECLARATIONS REGARDING COMMISSION PUBLIC CONTACT – None.
Associate Planner Fernandez presented the staff report which is on file in the Design
and Development Department.
Staff answered questions regarding procedures for continuing public hearing items
and regarding communications between the applicant and homeowners within the
project area.
CHAIRPERSON NIETO DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPEN AT 5:17 P.M.
Applicant Mark Hayden, Vice President of Development with Capstone Advisors –
introduced himself and answered the Commission’s questions regarding recent
7
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3 of 6 FEBRUARY 8, 2022
communications with existing homeowners; and changes to lot size and
architectural design of proposed plans.
PUBLIC SPEAKER VIA TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY: Mike Rowe, La Quinta –
spoke in support of continuing this item to allow more time for discussion with the
applicant.
CHAIRPERSON NIETO DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 5:23 P.M.
MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Chairperson Nieto/Commissioner
Proctor to continue this Public Hearing for Tentative Tract Map 2021-0001 (TTM
38083) for 37 residential lots on 24.46 acres within the Griffin Ranch Specific Plan
area located at the south side of Avenue 54 between Madison Street and Monroe
Street and an addendum to the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration
(EA2006-577) to a date uncertain. Motion passed unanimously.
2. CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 11, 2022: ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0007 (SDP 2004-816, AMENDMENT NO.
2) AND MINOR ADJUSTMENT 2021-0010 TO AMEND SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL PLANS FOR BELLA AT PIAZZA SERENA; CEQA: THE PROJECT
IS CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION PREPARED FOR PIAZZA SERENA (EA2001-417); LOCATION:
NORTHWEST CORNER OF AVENUE 58 AND MONROE STREET
[PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-006]
DECLARATIONS REGARDING COMMISSION PUBLIC CONTACT – None.
Associate Planner Fernandez presented the staff report which is on file in the Design
and Development Department.
Staff answered questions regarding applicant communications with existing
homeowners; clarified the difference between the Modifications By Applicant and
Site Development Permit Amendment applications and the rule requiring Planning
Commission approval for modifications to square footage over 10% of previously
approved permits; calculations of square footage by livable versus total footprint;
discrepancies in calculated square footage from the Riverside County Assessor’s
office; adjustments made by applicant to increase square footage from the
previously presented plans and which plan types were revised; responsibility for
street, median landscape, and curb improvements, and future maintenance along
Monroe Street.
CHAIRPERSON NIETO DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 6:05 P.M.
Applicant Edgar Gomez of Richmond American Homes provided additional
information regarding recent adjustments of square footage; changes made to the
8
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 of 6 FEBRUARY 8, 2022
proposed elevations and replacement of Contemporary Prairie style with Italian;
prospective timeline to complete Monroe Street roadway improvements; and
construction access via Monroe Street. Applicant answered Commission questions
regarding communications with the surrounding residents and the Homeowners
Association.
PUBLIC SPEAKER VIA TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY: David Nola, La Quinta –
spoke in opposition of the project due to decreased square footage of proposed
homes as compared to the Riverside County Assessor’s office and the potential
adverse effect on property values of the existing homes within the community;
lack of communication with the applicant; and commented on the applicant’s
reputation and past behaviors.
PUBLIC SPEAKER VIA TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY: Tamara Hay, La Quinta
– spoke in opposition of the project due to decreased square footage of the
proposed homes; lack of communication with applicant; and security concerns
during construction.
PUBLIC SPEAKER VIA TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY: Kurt Starkweather, La
Quinta, and President of the Piazza Serena Homeowners Association – spoke in
opposition of the project due to decreased square footage of proposed homes; and
questioned whether the new Italian elevation would be the elevation built within
the project.
PUBLIC SPEAKER VIA TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY: Randy Young, La Quinta
– spoke in opposition of the project due to decreased square footage of proposed
homes; and lack of landscape maintenance at the development’s entrance and
throughout the community.
PUBLIC SPEAKER VIA TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY: Rosie Young, La Quinta
– spoke in opposition of the project and requested that the square footage of the
proposed homes be increased.
PUBLIC SPEAKER VIA TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY: Heidi Zadok, La Quinta
– spoke in opposition of the project due to decreased square footage of proposed
homes and potentially adverse effects on property values of existing homes.
PUBLIC SPEAKER VIA TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY: Natalie Kennel and
Roger Greenwald, La Quinta – spoke in opposition of the project due to lack of
communication with applicant; inconsistency of the size, style and living space of
the proposed plans with existing homes; and landscaping maintenance managed
by the existing homeowner’s association.
9
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 of 6 FEBRUARY 8, 2022
PUBLIC SPEAKER VIA TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY: Michelle and Tim
Hansen, La Quinta – spoke in opposition of the project due to decreased square
footage of proposed homes.
PUBLIC SPEAKER VIA TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY: David Crouse, La Quinta
– spoke in opposition of the project due to inconsistent architecture; lack of
communication with the applicant; poor landscape maintenance of common areas;
and concern with the proposed plans having potentially adverse effects on property
values of the existing homes.
PUBLIC SPEAKER VIA TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY: Donald Imoto, La Quinta
– expressed concerns regarding landscape maintenance at the community
entrance and applicant’s management of the property.
Applicant answered Commission questions regarding the entity responsible for
landscape maintenance of common area, open space, and roadway areas;
approximate sale price for proposed units; visual compatibility of proposed units
from the street view. Applicant provided additional comment regarding the
proposed plans decreasing property values, reputation and experience of Richmond
American Homes, and quality and sizes of the proposed units in relation to existing
homes.
CHAIRPERSON NIETO DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 6:58 P.M.
Commission discussion and comment followed regarding relationship and
communication between the applicant and existing homeowners; adjustments and
changes made to the plans from the previously proposed units and compatibility
with existing homes; guidelines for purview and consideration of this item; visual
street view of proposed units; Homeowners Association versus applicant
responsibilities to the community with regard to landscaping and maintenance;
applicant knowledge and understanding of the current property market; and
timeline for roadway landscape requirements.
MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Caldwell/Hassett
to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2022-006 to approve Site Development
Permit 2021-0007 (SDP2004-816) and Minor Adjustment 2021-0010 subject to the
Findings and Conditions of Approval, and amendment to Condition No. 7 requiring
landscape improvements to be completed at beginning of construction:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE BELLA AT PIAZZA SERENA A SITE DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT AMENDMENT AND MINOR ADJUSTMENT TO AMEND PIAZZA SERENA
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PLANS AND FIND THE PROJECT CONSISTENT
WITH MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CERTIFIED FOR PIAZZA SERENA
(EA2001-417)
10
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 of 6 FEBRUARY 8, 2022
CASE NUMBERS: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0007
(SDP2004-816, AMENDMENT 2); MINOR ADJUSTMENT 2021-0010
APPLICANT: RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES
Motion passed: AYES – 4 (Caldwell, Currie, Hassett, and Nieto); NOES – 3 (McCune,
Proctor, and Tyerman). ABSENT – none; ABSTAIN – none.
STAFF ITEMS – None.
REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS – None.
COMMISSIONERS’ ITEMS
Commission requested clarification on the purpose of the upcoming Special Joint
Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission regarding the Village District
scheduled for March 1, 2022; requested a special meeting with a presentation on
State Senate Bills 9 and 10 to discuss auxiliary dwelling units and density
requirements that may affect the City’s housing planning; requested an update on
citywide projects be presented at the next Planning Commission meeting; update
regarding current local mask mandate; and ability to require developers to have
knowledge of local and surrounding property values.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Proctor/McCune Currie to adjourn the meeting at 7:28 p.m. Motion passed
unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
TANIA FLORES, Commission Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
11
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1
City of La Quinta
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: April 12, 2022
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA TITLE: ADOPT RESOLUTIONS TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2019-0010, AND APPROVE
SPECIFIC PLAN 2019-0003 (AMENDMENT V TO ANDALUSIA SPECIFIC PLAN),
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2019-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2019-0004, SPECIFIC
PLAN 2020-0002, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2019-0005, DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT 2021-0002 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0001; CEQA:
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH
#2021020310); LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 58, NORTH OF AVENUE 60 AND
EAST AND WEST OF MADISON STREET
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission (Commission) may wish to continue the item to the
meeting of April 26, 2022, when the full Commission will be in attendance and
available to hear the item. However, should the Commission wish to proceed,
the recommendations are to:
Adopt a resolution recommending that the Council certify the Coral Mountain
Resort EIR (SCH #2021020310) and direct staff to prepare CEQA Findings
and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for Council consideration; and
Adopt a resolution recommending that the Council approve SP2019-0003,
GPA2019-0002, ZC2019-0004, SP2020-0002, TTM2019-0005, DA2021-0002
and SDP2021-0001 subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 22, 2022.
At the conclusion of that meeting, in conjunction with a continuance to this
date, the Commission requested additional information, as follows:
a.Updates to the project’s construction timeline that provide additional
certainty for its completion.
b.Additional information regarding the reuse of the Wave Basin should it
cease being used for its proposed purpose.
c.Additional information on the light emanating from the top of the light
poles, over the planned development.
12
d. The applicant’s potential quantification of a reduced number of short-term
vacation rentals within the project.
e. An analysis of the cost/revenue implications of reducing short-term
vacation rentals as it relates to the City’s costs.
SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS
The detailed analysis of the project, contained in the March 22, 2022, staff
report, is not repeated herein, but is rather incorporated in its entirety by this
reference
(https://laqlaserweb.laquintaca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=562855&dbid=
1&repo=CityofLaQuinta). The Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report
documents can be accessed at www.laquintaca.gov/cmresort. Public comments
received up through March 22 are provided in the March 22, 2022, agenda
packet and available at the link provided. Comments received since the public
hearing, from March 23 to April 7, are provided in Attachment 6.
Additional items requested by the Commission are addressed individually below.
Construction Schedule
The Development Agreement (DA) contains a Performance Schedule which
provides ranges of time for project development (Attachment 1). The following
Table 1 summarizes this timeline. As shown in the Table, development could
span a timeframe of up to 25 years.
Table 1
Development Agreement Performance Schedule Summary
Project Component
Years
Wave Basin and some resort residential and hotel development
(quantities undefined)
3-5
Completion of hotel and balance of resort residential
(quantities undefined)
5-10
8,000± SF of Neighborhood Commercial 3-6
220 single family units in Planning Area 2 8-15
11,000± SF Neighborhood Commercial 9-12
250 single family units in Planning Area 2 (balance of single-
family units)
15-22
41,000± SF Neighborhood Commercial 20-23
The applicant has not proposed any changes or refinements to the Performance
Schedule, but they have proposed revisions to the DA that would allow for the
mutual modification of the schedule and, if any item of performance is not
completed timely, then the City would have the right (but not the obligation) to
13
terminate the Agreement as to the specific portion of the Project that has not
been completed (as opposed to terminating the entire DA) following the notice
and cure periods.
Wave Basin Reuse
The applicant has proposed additional provisions to address the potential that
the Wave Basin permanently closes during the term of the DA. The applicant
would be required, contractually, to dismantle and remove the wave making
machinery and would either (i) continue to operate the basin itself as a
recreational lake amenity, or (ii) seek City approval for an alternative use,
including obtaining a Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Permit, or other
applicable entitlement, if required.
Light Visibility at the Light Source
The Commission expressed concern regarding the light that could be visible
above the project’s development, emanating from the 80-foot light poles
proposed around the wave basin. In response to this concern, the applicant
prepared additional sightline studies (Attachment 2) which show light from the
wave basin visible above development on the site at the Lion’s Gate entry, north
of the project site (page 3 of Attachment 2); at the Andalusia entry, east of the
project site (page 5 of Attachment 2); and from Avenue 60, south of the project
site (page 7 of Attachment 2). Light would not be visible from Madison Street to
the east of the project site.
Short-Term Vacation Rental Reduction and Associated Costs/Revenue
The Commission asked for additional information about two items relating to
short-term vacation rentals (STVR). First, to what extent the applicant would be
willing to reduce the number of STVRs in the project from the current potential
600, and second, what would be the “break even” point for the City in terms of
costs and revenues from the project.
Regarding the first item, the applicant did not propose revisions to the DA
concerning the potential number of residential and hotel units at the project or
the general applicability of the short-term vacation rental allowances. The
Commission, however, may discuss or propose alternatives or limitations on
STVRs.
Regarding the second item, the City prepared a cost/revenue analysis for the
project which compares the City’s costs to provide services with the revenues
that could result from the project. This analysis was based on certain
assumptions about how the project will develop which are generally consistent
with the development scenario used in the traffic impact analysis:
14
26 estate homes with an average price of $6 million per unit built in
Phase 1.
104 Surf Village homes with an average price of $2.75 million per unit
built in Phase 1.
470 homes with an average price of $2 million per unit built in Phase 3.
150 hotel rooms built in Phase 1.
10,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial, and 57,000 square feet
of resort commercial development built in Phase 1.
25,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial development built in
Phase 2.
25,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial development built in
Phase 3.
Hotel average daily rate of $350 per room.
Resort commercial Food and Beverage sales of $6.6 million annually.
Resort Commercial retail sales of $5.5 million annually.
Short-term vacation rental participation of 30% of 600 units.
Short-term vacation rental occupancy rate of 25%.
Short-term vacation rental rate of $800 per unit per night.
Should development not follow these assumptions, both costs and revenues
would be affected. Since the primary costs are associated with single family
homes, and the primary revenues are associated with transient occupancy tax,
changes in how the project develops would significantly impact cost-recovery.
As shown in Table 2, the project would result in costs to the City, primarily
associated with Police and Fire services.
Table 2
Annual Project Cost Summary
Phase I Phase II Phase III Build Out
General Government $137,362 $137,359 $367,926 $367,926
Police Protection Services $313,450 $313,450 $839,598 $839,598
Fire Department Services $143,625 $143,625 $384,710 $384,710
Total Project-related
General Fund Costs $594,437 $594,434 $1,592,234 $1,592,234
15
Table 3 provides the project revenues, based on the assumptions described
above, where all 600 units can be STVRs. When Table 2 is compared to Table 3,
the project is revenue-positive to the City.
Table 3
Summary of Annual Revenues
Phase I Phase II Phase III Build Out
Property Tax $0 $0 $0 $0
Property Transfer Tax $44,880 $38,500 $127,600 $74,800
Local Sales Tax $276,523 $423,282 $570,040 $570,040
Transient Occupancy Tax $1,735,849 $1,735,849 $2,829,480 $2,829,480
Total Annual Revenues $2,057,252 $2,197,630 $3,527,120 $3,474,320
To address the Commission’s question, the fiscal model was altered to remove
STVRs, and to continue assuming that the 150 hotel rooms are constructed and
operational in Phase 1. Table 4 provides a summary of the costs and revenues
with no STVRs. As shown in the Table, assuming that the hotel builds out early,
and that the commercial development builds out as 117,000 square feet of retail
development, the project is revenue-positive without STVRs. However, as shown
in the last row of the Table, without any Transient Occupancy Tax (no hotel or
STVRs), the project is revenue-negative to the City.
16
Table 4
Hotel Only/No STVRs Costs/Revenues Associated with Buildout
Summary Table
Buildout Phase
Phase I Phase II Phase III Build Out
ANNUAL REVENUES
General Fund:
Property Tax $0 $0 $0 $0
Property Transfer Tax $44,880 $38,500 $127,600 $74,800
Local Sales Tax $276,523 $423,282 $570,040 $570,040
Transient Occupancy Tax $1,433,355 $1,433,355 $1,433,355 $1,433,355
Motor Vehicle In-Lieu $0 $0 $0 $0
Restricted Funds:
Highway Users Gas Tax $0 $0 $0 $0
Fire Property Tax $0 $0 $0 $0
ANNUAL COSTS
General Fund:
General Government $137,362 $137,359 $367,926 $367,926
Police Protection Services $313,450 $313,450 $839,598 $839,598
Fire Department Services $143,625 $143,625 $384,710 $384,710
Subtotal: $594,437 $594,434 $1,592,234 $1,592,234
SUMMARY OF
REVENUES/COSTS:
Revenues:
Total Annual General Fund
Revenues $1,754,758 $1,895,137 $2,130,995 $2,078,195
Total Annual Revenues at
Phase Buildout $1,754,758 $1,895,137 $2,130,995 $2,078,195
Costs:
Total Annual General Fund
Costs $594,437 $594,434 $1,592,234 $1,592,234
Total Annual Costs at Phase
Build Out $594,437 $594,434 $1,592,234 $1,592,234
Annual Cash Flow at Phase
Build Out $1,160,321 $1,300,703 $538,761 $485,961
Annual Cash Flow with No
Transient Occupancy Tax
Revenue -$273,034 -$132,652 -$894,594 -$947,394
17
Additional Information: Regional Trail
There was also discussion during the previous hearing of the trail being proposed
by Desert Recreation District (DRD) on and around the proposed project. The
applicant provided a composite exhibit which shows the project in the context of
the DRD park and trail system in the area. The DRD park and trail system will
be accessible to the public. The exhibit is provided as Attachment 3.
Additional Information: Vision Document
After the hearing, a Commissioner asked whether the “Vision” document the
applicant referred to in their presentation could be provided to the Commission.
The applicant provided two documents: the Vision document and a Design
document. They are provided as Attachments 4 and 5, respectively.
CONCLUSION
The materials and analysis provided above do not present any changes to the
project’s ultimate potential build-out, but (as noted above) revisions to the DA
have been proposed. The Findings for each application can still be made.
However, the Commission may wish to continue the item to the meeting of April
26, 2022, when the full Commission will be available to hear the item.
Prepared by: Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Planner
Approved by: Danny Castro, Design and Development Director
Attachments: 1. Development Agreement Performance Schedule
2. Sight Line Analysis – Lighting at Top of Poles
3. DRD Park and Trail Map with Proposed Project
4. Coral Mountain Vision Document
5. Coral Mountain Design Document
6. Written Public Comments received from March 23, 2022, to
April 7, 2022
7. Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report documents
provided under separate cover and available at:
www.laquintaca.gov/cmresort
18
ATTACHMENT 1 CM Wave Development, LLC Performance Schedule – DRAFT – 3/10/2022 Project Component: Start Completion* Planning Area 1 (Corner Neighborhood Commercial): Phase 1 (approx. 8,000 sq. ft.) Within 36 months of 3 years after Start Date Vesting Date** Phase 2 (approx. 11,000 sq. ft.) By 300th Residential C‐of‐O 3 years after Start Date Phase 3 (approx. 41,000 sq. ft.) By 500th Residential C‐of‐O 3 years after Start Date Planning Area 2 (Low‐density Residential): Phase 1 (approx. 220 units) Within 3 years of Completion of 7 years after Start Date Wave Basin and Resort Village Residential Units Phase 2 (approx. 250 units) Within 3 years of Completion 7 years after Start Date of Phase 1 Planning Area 3 (Tourist Commercial): Phase 1A (Wave Basin and first phase of Within 3 years of Vesting Date 5 years after Start Date hotel, resort residential, and estate lots) Phase 1B (Remaining hotel, resort residential) Within 5 years of first C‐of‐O in 5 years after Start Date Planning Area 3 Planning Area 4 (Open Space): N/A N/A *Completion defined as 70% of C‐of‐O’s issued, and are the outside deadlines permissible under this Agreement, subject to the terms of this Agreement. However, if Developer provides evidence reasonably satisfactory to the City that then existing market conditions do not allow for the development on economically feasible terms and orderly absorption of such product type to the point of completion as specified above, then such period shall be extended for 3 years. **Vesting Date is defined as the later of (i) the Effective Date of the Development Agreement, and (ii) the running of all applicable statute of limitations and referendum petition deadlines with no legal challenges or petitions having been filed or submitted, or if filed or submitted, successfully resolved to the satisfaction of Developer and City 19
AVENUE 60AVENUE 58MADISON STREETView "E"View "C"View "D"WaveAndalusia EntryLion's GateView "B"BasinSECTION VIEW INDEX MAPCORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: APRIL 5, 2022ATTACHMENT 220
VISUAL SIMULATION VIEWPOINT "B": LINE OF SIGHT FROM LION'S GATE ENTRYCORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: APRIL 29, 2021Note:The project fronts Avenue 58. There will be a 6-foot wall and landscapingalong the public street, similar to the existing surrounding residentialcommunities. Additionally, the existing utility poles at the project's frontagewill be placed underground. Higher project features (hotel and light poles)are approximately 0.75 miles from this location, at the base of CoralMountain. These are not visible above the perimeter wall in theforeground and are further screened by landscape and residential homes.The mountain panorama and ridgelines remain visible.Max. 80ft WaveBasin Light PoleEXISTING CONDITIONVISUAL SIMULATIONVISUAL SIMULATION WITH HOUSING21
Prop. Wave Basin LightLion's GateEx. Mountain SideEx. Mountain PeakLine of Sight (View Peak)Line of SightLine of SightLine of Sight (View Peak)EntryAvenue 58(Public Road)Line of SightProp. Right of WayProp. 6' PerimeterWallProp. 12' Meandering SidewalkProp. Perimeter Tree16'75'30'Ex. Edge of PavementEx. Curb & GutterLINE OF SIGHT SECTIONN.T.SPARKWAY SECTION "B": VIEW FROM LION'S GATE ENTRYCORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: MARCH 30, 2022See Detail 'A'DETAIL 'A'AVENUE 58 / LION'S GATE ENTRY(Public Road)22
Prop. Wave Basin LightLion's GateEx. Mountain SideEx. Mountain PeakLine of Sight (View Peak)Line of SightLine of SightLine of Sight (View Peak)EntryAvenue 58(Public Road)80' MAX.Prop. Wave Basin LightLine of SightProp. Wave Basin4,002' TO VIEWING LOCATION11.5'View Line to Top of LightLINE OF SIGHT SECTIONN.T.SWAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "B": VIEW FROM LION'S GATE ENTRYCORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: APRIL 5, 2022DETAIL 'A'WAVE BASIN / LIGHTSee Detail 'A'N.T.S23
VISUAL SIMULATION VIEWPOINT "C": LINE OF SIGHT FROM ANDALUSIA ENTRYCORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: APRIL 29, 2021Max. 40ft HotelMax. 80ft WaveBasin Light PoleNote:The project boundary fronts Madison Street at this location. There will be a 6-foot perimeter wall and perimeter landscaping along the public street. Higher project features (hotel and lightpoles) are approximately 0.75 miles away from this location, at the base of Coral Mountain. The hotel and light poles are not visible above the community wall in the foreground and arefurther screened by landscape and residential homes. The hotel and light poles would barely be visible even without the perimeter wall. The mountain panorama and ridgelines remain visible.EXISTING CONDITIONVISUAL SIMULATION WITH PERIMETER WALL & LANDSCAPEVISUAL SIMULATION WITH HOUSINGVISUAL SIMULATION WITH HOTEL & WAVE BASIN LIGHTS24
Madison StreetAndalusiaLine of SightEntryPublic RoadLine of SightEx. Mountain PeakLine of Sight (View Peak)Line of Sight (View Peak)Ex. Mountain Side75'30'
16'75'30'16'LINE OF SIGHT SECTIONN.T.SPARKWAY SECTION "C": VIEW FROM ANDALUSIA ENTRYCORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: MARCH 30, 2022See Detail 'A'Line of SightDETAIL 'A'ANDALUSIA ENTRY / MADISON STREET(Public Road)Prop. Right of WayProp. 6' Perimeter WallEx. Curb & GutterLine of Sight (View Peak)Ex. Curb & GutterProp. 12' Meandering Sidewalk25
Madison StreetAndalusiaLine of SightEntryPublic RoadLine of SightEx. Mountain PeakLine of Sight (View Peak)Line of Sight (View Peak)Ex. Mountain Side3,563' TO VIEWING LOCATION40'
80' MAX.
21.8'
VIEW LINE TO TOP OF LIGHTLINE OF SIGHT SECTIONN.T.SWAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "C": VIEW FROM ANDALUSIA ENTRYCORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: APRIL 5, 2022Line of SightSee Detail 'A'DETAIL 'A'WAVE BASIN / LIGHTN.T.S.Prop. Wave BasinProp. HotelProp. Wave Basin Light26
VISUAL SIMULATION VIEWPOINT "D": LINE OF SIGHT FROM MADISON STREETCORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: APRIL 29, 2021Max. 40ft HotelMax. 80ft WaveBasin Light PoleNote:The project boundary fronts Madison Street at this location. There will be a 6-foot perimeter wall and perimeter landscaping along the public street. Similar to location C, higherproject features (hotel and light poles) are approximately 0.50 miles away from this location, at the base of Coral Mountain. The poles are barely visible even without thecommunity wall in the foreground, and would be completely screened by perimeter landscape and residential homes. The mountain panorama and ridgelines remain visible.EXISTING CONDITIONVISUAL SIMULATION WITH PERIMETER WALL & LANDSCAPEVISUAL SIMULATION WITH HOUSINGVISUAL SIMULATION WITH HOTEL & WAVE BASIN LIGHTS27
80' MAX.Prop. Wave Basin LightProp. Hotel40'Prop. Wave BasinAvenue 60Ex. Mountain SideEx. Mountain PeakLine of Sight (View Peak)Line of Sight (View Peak)Line of SightLine of Sight(Public Road)75'30'16'LINE OF SIGHT SECTIONN.T.SPARKWAY SECTION "D": VIEW FROM MADISON STREETCORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: MARCH 30, 2022See Detail 'A'Line of Sight (View Peak)DETAIL 'A'Line of SightMADISON STREET(Public Road)Prop. Right of WayProp. 6' Perimeter WallProp. Perimeter TreeEx. Curb & GutterProp. 12' Meandering Sidewalk28
80' MAX.Prop. Wave Basin LightProp. Hotel40'Prop. Wave BasinAvenue 60Ex. Mountain SideEx. Mountain PeakLine of Sight (View Peak)Line of Sight (View Peak)Line of SightLine of Sight(Public Road)80' MAX.
40'2,745' TO VIEWING LOCATIONLINE OF SIGHT SECTIONN.T.SWAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "D": VIEW FROM MADISON STREETCORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: APRIL 5, 2022DETAIL 'A'WAVE BASIN / LIGHTProp. Wave BasinProp. Wave Basin LightSee Detail 'A'Prop. HotelLine of SightN.T.S.29
VISUAL SIMULATION VIEWPOINT "E": LINE OF SIGHT FROM AVENUE 60CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: APRIL 29, 2021Max. 80ft WaveBasin Light PoleEXISTING CONDITIONVISUAL SIMULATIONNote:The project boundary does not front Avenue 60 at this location but lies approximately 0.20 miles to the northwest. Thenearest light pole is approximately 0.25 miles from the viewpoint location and is largely screened by an existing palmgrove on a neighboring property. The ridgeline of Coral Mountain remains visible with little appreciable change.30
Prop. Wave Basin LightProp. Hotel40'Prop. Wave BasinAvenue 60(Public Road)Line of SightLine of Sight80' MAX.Ex. Boundary & Prop. Wall of Project80' MAX.Prop. Wave Basin28.7'
View Line to Top of LightLINE OF SIGHT SECTIONN.T.SWAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "E": FROM AVENUE 60CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.comMSA CONSULTING, INC.> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYINGEXHIBIT DATE: APRIL 5, 2022Line of SightDETAIL 'A'WAVE BASIN / LIGHTProp. Wave Basin LightSee Detail 'A'N.T.S31
ATTACHMENT 332
ATTACHMENT 433
Contents:
Mission 04
Vision 05
Ethos 07
Location 09
Site Plan 11
Program 12
Offeri ngs 15
2
34
35
36
37
38
39
9LocationWELCOME TO OUR BREATHTAKING 384 ACRE HOME BASE, WELCOME TO OUR BREATHTAKING 384 ACRE HOME BASE, SURROUNDED BY 360 DEGREE VIEWS OF RUGGED MOUNTAIN SURROUNDED BY 360 DEGREE VIEWS OF RUGGED MOUNTAIN RANGES. IF YOU LOOK CLOSELY YOU CAN SEE WHERE THIS LAND RANGES. IF YOU LOOK CLOSELY YOU CAN SEE WHERE THIS LAND WAS ONCE UNDER THE SEA, AND THE FOSSILIZED CORAL THAT IS WAS ONCE UNDER THE SEA, AND THE FOSSILIZED CORAL THAT IS STILL AT YOUR FEET. AND, IF YOU LISTEN CLOSELY YOU CAN HEAR STILL AT YOUR FEET. AND, IF YOU LISTEN CLOSELY YOU CAN HEAR THE WATER THAT STILL FLOWS IN ABUNDANCE BENEATH THE EARTH. THE WATER THAT STILL FLOWS IN ABUNDANCE BENEATH THE EARTH. THE GOAL WAS TO FIND LAND THAT ALLOWED FOR SOMETHING THE GOAL WAS TO FIND LAND THAT ALLOWED FOR SOMETHING TO BE CREATED THAT HAD NOT BEEN SEEN BEFORE, AND WITH THIS TO BE CREATED THAT HAD NOT BEEN SEEN BEFORE, AND WITH THIS SITE ALL EXPECTATIONS WERE EXCEEDED. CORAL MOUNTAIN IS SITE ALL EXPECTATIONS WERE EXCEEDED. CORAL MOUNTAIN IS CONVENIENTLY OFF THE BEATEN PATH, BUT NOT TOO FAR FROM CONVENIENTLY OFF THE BEATEN PATH, BUT NOT TOO FAR FROM IT. JUST TWO AND A HALF HOURS FROM LOS ANGELES AND SAN IT. JUST TWO AND A HALF HOURS FROM LOS ANGELES AND SAN DIEGO WE ARE ACCESSIBLE IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD.DIEGO WE ARE ACCESSIBLE IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD.40
41
42
43
13
44
45
15OfferingsCORAL MOUNTAIN IS A CURATED COLLECTION OF CORAL MOUNTAIN IS A CURATED COLLECTION OF GROUNDGROUND--BREAKING AMENITIES IN SURF, ADVENTURE BREAKING AMENITIES IN SURF, ADVENTURE SPORT, TRAINING, WELLNESS AND REJUVENTATION. SPORT, TRAINING, WELLNESS AND REJUVENTATION. ALL AT YOUR FINGERTIPS. ALL IN ONE PLACE.ALL AT YOUR FINGERTIPS. ALL IN ONE PLACE.46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
323263
64
65
66
67
68
By combining advanced renewables with storage, and tying everything By combining advanced renewables with storage, and tying everything together with TAE's power management technology, we're using together with TAE's power management technology, we're using electricity from the grid only when absolutely necessary, and electricity from the grid only when absolutely necessary, and bringing our environmental footprint to an absolute minimum.bringing our environmental footprint to an absolute minimum.383869
70
71
ATTACHMENT 572
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
ATTACHMENT 6
102
1
Tania Flores
From:John Leja
Sent:Wednesday, March 23, 2022 3:04 PM
To:Planning WebMail
Subject:Letter of support for CM wave park.
Attachments:Leja CM Letter of Support.docx
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when
opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **
Sent from my iPhone
John Leja
103
March 23, 2022
John Leja
La Quinta, CA 92253
City Planning Commission
City Council of La Quinta
To Whom it May Concern‐
I am a resident of Andalusia and a member of Andalusia CC. AS a developer, I can understand how much
thought goes into a new project like this as well as the potential issues that may arise from those who
are opposed or who are weary of the unknown. That being said, I have studied this project ad nauseum
and am in full support of the Coral Mountain Wave Project moving forward. I feel strongly that the city
should support this project and allow it to move forward. This city is in need of something different and
a younger energy. Coral Mountain fits this need very nicely and a new hotel in the area would be a big
plus. The developers seem extremely capable and are well funded, two very important components
when considering any type of development.
Sincerely‐
John Leja
104
1
Tania Flores
From:Consulting Planner
Sent:Sunday, March 27, 2022 10:13 AM
To:Tania Flores
Cc:Cheri Flores
Subject:Fw: Coral mountain wave park
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Mary Greening
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 1:40 PM
To: Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>
Cc: Dan Greening
Subject: Coral mountain wave park
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when
opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **
My husband, Dan, and I previously submitted comments regarding this project. Since then we attended the light
display. After reading the original EIR we thought the impact of the lights would be minimal. We were VERY surprised at
the impact only 2 lights had. They were very bright and very visible. We lost much of the Mountain View. We can’t
image how bright it would be with all the planned lights.
We moved to Andalusia to regain the night sky we had lost at our prior home in La Quinta when the big box stores went
up on Hwy 111. We are very hopeful it won’t happen to us again.
I also want to reiterate an item from our prior communication…..one entrance to the property is not enough. If this
project moves forward we suggest an entrance for homeowners where planned, and a separate entrance for the hotel
and events near the hotel complex.
And we continue to be concerned about the noise from the wave equipment, heaters, speakers, etc.
In summary, this proposed project does NOT fit in the surrounding quiet, peaceful, environment.
Thank you,
Dan and Mary Greening
Mary Greening
105
2
Sent from my iPad
106
1
Tania Flores
From:Colette Young
Sent:Saturday, March 26, 2022 11:49 AM
To:Planning WebMail
Subject:Water park
Attachments:Larry Young CM Letter of Support.docx
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when
opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **
Sent from my iPhone
107
March 23, 2022
Larry & Colette Young
La Quinta, Ca 92253
City Planning Commission, La Quinta
City Council of La Quinta
To Whom It May Concern:
This is a letter to inform the representatives of the La Quinta Planning Commission that my wife Colette
and I, Larry Young, are very much in favor of the Coral Mountain Resort (Kelly Slater Wave) moving
forward. We have had a home in La Quinta since 1987 and have seen this city change and grow for the
better over the last 4 decades. As the former CEO of a Fortune 500 beverage company, I am very
familiar with the issues that can arise when it comes to change and dealing with the “unknown”. While I
understand that this can be unnerving for many, the fact is that growth, change and embracing the
future are all necessary components of a successful company, city, development, etc. My wife and I
have been involved in developing real estate projects both here in California as well as in Texas, and we
are excited to see this project at Coral Mountain come to life.
We have been watching this very closely and have studied all of the reports, EIR’s and comments from
the naysayers in our community regarding this project. We feel very strongly that the developers are
not only extremely capable of completing this project, but also that they have answered all of the
questions/concerns with complete transparency and grace and that they are well funded to see this
project through to completion. Colette and I were residents of and members of PGA West for several
years before moving to Andalusia which is where we now reside. When we first came to La Quinta in
1987, one of the most beautiful and memorable elements of this city was seeing the mountains at the
entrance to PGA West lit up at night. It was and still is breathtaking. The fact that people are
complaining about lighting, which probably won’t be visible enough to make a difference, is nonsense.
In order for cities to grow, development needs to take place, and the bottom line is that the piece of
property on 58th and Madison is going to be developed by someone, at some point, and lights are a part
of a development. We feel that this is the right project for our city and that it will bring new and
necessary life and energy into the back corner of La Quinta. When we bought our home in Andalusia,
we were very aware that new homes and a new community were going to be built on the land across
the street. Although we did expect a second golf course to be on this particular property, we have
accepted that this is now not the case and are still excited to see a new project be developed on this
vacant land. In fact, we plan to buy a home in the new Coral Mountain Development.
We are in strong support of the Coral Mountain project and feel the city should allow this to move
forward.
Sincerely,
Larry & Colette Young
108
1
Tania Flores
From:Anne Birdsong
Sent:Sunday, March 27, 2022 8:33 AM
To:Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Consulting Planner; Jon
McMillen; Danny Castro
Subject:OPPOSITION TO WAVE PARK
I respectively voice my concerns and complete OPPOSITION to the Wave Park close to Andalusia
Golf Club and the surrounding area.
This is the wrong place for such a busy, loud, environmentally bad business venture so close to
our beautiful mountain range and developed, peaceful communities.
Please don’t do this.
Anne Birdsong
Andalusia Country Club homeowner
109
1
Tania Flores
From:Deidre
Sent:Sunday, March 27, 2022 8:10 AM
To:Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Consulting Planner; Jon
McMillen; Danny Castro
Subject:Coral mountain wave park
How can u possibly consider an 18 million gallon project when we are in a drought? Very
irresponsible!!!
Deidre Braun
La Quinta resident
Sent from my iPhone
110
1
Tania Flores
From:Jane Fawke
Sent:Sunday, March 27, 2022 2:15 PM
To:Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Consulting Planner; Jon
McMillen; Danny Castro
Subject:Coral Mountain Resort.
Commissioners,
Once again, I am appealing to you to refuse permission for the Coral Mountain Resort.
Please realize that climate change will have a huge effect on our fragile deserts, and a precious
resource like water must not be wasted on such a stupid project.
My friends and neighbors are very concerned about the housing boom in both the high and low
desert, all these extra people will, of course, lead to drain
Jane "Spider" Fawke
111
1
Tania Flores
From:Jane Fawke
Sent:Sunday, March 27, 2022 3:09 PM
To:Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Consulting Planner; Jon
McMillen; Danny Castro
Subject:Coral Mountain Resort,
Commissioners,
Once again, I am appealing to you to refuse permission for the construction of the Coral
Mountain Resort.
This development will cause a tremendous waste of resources to our already fragile desert is
system.
Jane "Spider" Fawke
Retired Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency Park Ranger.
Certified CA Master Naturalist.
Certified C A Climate Steward.
Joshua Tree,
CA 92252.
112
1
Tania Flores
From:Mary Greening
Sent:Sunday, March 27, 2022 11:26 AM
To:Consulting Planner
Cc:Dan Greening
Subject:Wave park feedback
We have had a chance to review the Traffic changes outlined in the deck from last Tuesday’s
presentation and add our feedback in addition to our prior comments:
For our relatively sleepy end of town, there seems to be an abundance of traffic signals. There
are 9 proposed and as people who regularly drive in this area, we would suggest that none are
currently needed. We would hope that a review of traffic patterns would be done before signals
are added.
We are totally opposed to traffic lights at 58th and Madison and at the property entry. These
would be very close together. A roundabout at 58th and Madison would be more neighbor-
friendly, if and when traffic mitigation is needed. Adding colored traffic lights in addition to the
wave lights would just increase the light disruption and impact on our views.
We continue to recommend a second main entrance to the property near the wave park and
hotels/transient areas. This would reduce the traffic back up at any one entrance. It would also
keep the transient traffic out of the residential areas of the Property. If special events are
approved, a light at that intersection could be part of the consideration.
Currently Madison carries a heavy load of vendor trucks. This is likely because Monroe hasn’t
been improved. I believe improving Monroe and adding roundabouts or lights as necessary
would be the first step. Then evaluate Madison traffic over time to decide if any mitigation is
necessary.
Lastly, we were very disappointed to see the plan for all residences to allow STR’s. This changes
the entire resort to tourist and does not, in any way, fit with the surrounding neighborhoods.
Given the negative impact of STR’s, this would detract from the developer’s vision of a high end
property. The hotel and condo’s offer plenty of short-term stay opportunities and any overflow
could benefit the new Talus hotels.
Mary Greening
Sent from my iPad
113
1
Tania Flores
From:John Perry
Sent:Sunday, March 27, 2022 11:28 AM
To:Nicole Criste (Contract Planner)
Subject:Follow-up to Coral Mountain Testimony
Attachments:CORAL MOUNTAIN FOLLOW.pdf
Nicole,
Please accept the attached letter as a follow‐up to my written and oral testimony.
‐‐
John S. Perry
La Quinta, CA
114
John S. Perry
La Quinta, CA 92253
March 27, 2022
TO: La Quinta Planning Commission
RE: Coral Mountain Resort
I’m a longtime homeowner and full-time resident in Trilogy at La Quinta.
This letter is a follow-up to my written and oral testimony on March 22.
Most of the testimony against the project falls into two categories: Either the
opponent doesn’t accept the findings of staff or the final environmental
review or they want the Planning Commission to deny the application
based on universal concerns, such as climate change, drought and open
space preservation.
In both cases, they are asking you to disregard the science and procedures
prescribed by state and city regulations. Or take on an activist function
outside the role of a planning commission.
The CEQA process is designed to identify significant environmental impacts
of a proposed project prior to its consideration and approval. This was
done, and city staff and other responsible agencies addressed necessary
mitigation measures.
I encourage the Planning Commission to focus your attention on the facts
specific to the project and evaluate the proposal properly.
Thank you for your time and attention on the Coral Mountain Resort
proposal.
115
1
Tania Flores
From:Carol & Tony
Sent:Sunday, March 27, 2022 8:28 AM
To:Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Consulting Planner; Jon
McMillen; Danny Castro
Subject:Wave Project
As a year-round resident of LaQuinta, and a concerned CA citizen of adequate water supply, we
urge you to reject this project in its entirety as proposed.
Carol Peyton
Anthony Laperuto
LaQuinta
Sent from my iPad
116
1
Tania Flores
From:Mark Reynolds
Sent:Sunday, March 27, 2022 10:10 AM
To:Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Consulting Planner; Jon
McMillen; Danny Castro
Subject:Don’t ride the wave
Hello,
I will keep this brief.
A wave park sounds fun and it has a cool and ironic vibe being situated in the desert. However
just for that reason and for the fact that we are again in a drought with looming climate change
that will further impact our world, the usage of a vital resource in limited supply for people to
splash around in is frankly vulgar and reflects irresponsible stewardship.
Please consider not only the negative impacts that the construction of the wave park will create
for our community but also how this makes us look.
Best regards,
Mark Reynolds
La Quinta
...sent from my mobile device
117
1
Tania Flores
From:Jan Talbott
Sent:Sunday, March 27, 2022 10:02 AM
To:Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Consulting Planner; Jon
McMillen; Danny Castro
Subject:La Quinta Wave Park
As a resident of Trilogy La Quinta near the northwest corner of our development, I’d like to
register my strong opposition to this project. I believe the community is being deliberately
misled and lied to about water usage, effects of lighting, noise, traffic, and accessibility.
I think little or no effort has been made toward assessing the strong possibility that this project
will prove financially unsustainable and the longer termed ramifications of such an eventuality.
Please do not recommend or approve this project. It is a bad fit for our lovely community!
Jan Wm. Talbott
Sent from my iPhone
118
119
1
Tania Flores
From:William Wortman
Sent:Sunday, March 27, 2022 9:54 AM
To:Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Consulting Planner; Jon
McMillen; Danny Castro
Subject:Wave Park
I strongly urge you to vote against approval of the proposed wave park development. This
project will ruin the beauty and tranquility of our community, create new unwanted congestion
and traffic burden and waste our valuable water resources.
Sent from my iPad
William Wortman
120
1
Tania Flores
From:Bobbie Fleury
Sent:Monday, March 28, 2022 1:30 PM
To:Tania Flores
Subject:Re: Coral Mountain Wave Park development
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Good Afternoon Tania ‐
I would appreciate it if you would provide my comments below to the members of the Planning Commission.
Thank you for your assistance.
Bobbie Fleury
To the members of the La Quinta Planning Commission:
My name is Bobbie Fleury and I am an 18 year resident of Trilogy.
Rather than talk today about the bits and pieces of the EIR, I’d prefer to concentrate on one
major aspect of the proposed planned Coral Mountain development, and life as it currently is
in this corner of the city. I’m referring to the aesthetic quality of our area.
I’ve thought for years that we sit so far from everything, but that’s actually a double‐edged
sword. Yes, we do, but we have a peaceful, serene, beautiful place to call home.
City staff and Council seem to feel that this project will have “no significant impact” on the
surrounding area. How can that be?
If this zoning request change for a tourist/commercial site were to happen, that would forever
alter the culture, the feel, the tenure, of the place where so many people live. All around us,
from Ave. 50 to Ave. 60, from Madison to Monroe, it’s low‐density, single story residential. A
change of zoning, such as what has been requested, would be a slap in the face to thousands
of residents.
121
2
We will derive NO benefit from this project, since it’s for PRIVATE usage. Yet, it will affect our
quality of life forever. Once that Pandora’s box is open, there’s no going back. And then what’s
next – a gas station and drive‐thru eatery?
Changing the zoning to tourist/commercial just isn’t compatible with all that is currently built,
and what is planned to be built, in this southwest corner of La Quinta.
I know that money talks. But it’s time to back down this developer and deny this zoning
change request.
I respectfully ask that, before you make a decision, you go home; step back; look in the mirror;
and ask yourself “Is this really what we should be doing in our city, and to our residents.”
Thank you for your time and attention.
122
1
Tania Flores
From:Nancy French
Sent:Monday, March 28, 2022 3:36 PM
To:Planning WebMail
Subject:Against Coral Mountain Development
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Hello my name is Nancy French.
, La Quinta
I would like to formally oppose the Coral Mountain Resort private surf park development.
I respectfully ask: What problem does this project solve? Do we not have enough drought, short term rentals, traffic or
light pollution?
Encouraging residents to curtail their water use, and we comply, while this park would unnaturally hoard enough water to
sustain more than 30,000 residents - almost a tenth of the population of the entire Coachella Valley - sets a very poor
example and breeds mistrust in your constituants.
I also ask: Where are the throngs of people begging for a surf park, bodega and more retail shops here?
The Kelly Slater park in the Central Valley was built in a defunct water park in the middle of farm land, a location that
makes more sense and has less impact on it's neighbors. My sister who lives up there relayed that the locals refer to it as
an elitist rip off that stays empty most of the time due to the $10 thousand dollar pricetag to join. There are also big traffic
hassles when the Ranch hosts tournaments and concerts, which seem to be one of it's major money makers.
I feel that this type of tourist attraction is not in line with the lifestyle that we moved here for. If we wanted surf culture, we
would live near the beach. In all our time here, even with visiting grandchildren, we have never heard - "You know what
we feel like doing today in the desert? Surfing!"
Unlike residential developments that were considered controversial when they were proposed in the past - this is a
business relying on a trend. We've seen so many local businesses and attractions close down these past 2+ years. Right
now there are four wave pools proposed within an hour drive of one another, with locations at Wet ’n’ Wild Palm Springs
(Palm Springs Surf Club), Desert Willow Golf Resort (DSRT SURF), Thermal Beach Club and this one. - what happens
when this huge endeavor fails and leaves a gaping eyesore in the town? A titanic monument to bad city planning
reminding you that you should have listened to your residents. This type of attraction is more suited for a coastal
community where the surf culture already exists and where salt water could be used instead of wasting our precious
resource.
To infer - as the developer did at the beginning of his presentation tonight - that NOT allowing this "leisure" attraction puts
the community at financial risk or risk of becoming irrelevant - is ridiculous and fear based.
According to the IBA World Tour website and surfhungry.com the “Surf Ranch Experience” costs about $10,000, although
you can pick the deal that works for you. Premium tier guests pay more for the experience, and there is a booking fee in
addition. Sources say that every wave costs around $450 on average. The Valley population may be getting gradually
younger, but we are close enough to the ocean that we do not need a fake version of it in our back yard. This amusement
park will not be assessible to low-income kids who've never seen the beach.
A wave basin's main audience is young, rich, straight men - and as a single woman here, I can attest to the fact that there
are not a lot of those around here, so if your market research has found them, I'd love to know their exact location -
thanks.
Most importantly this park's footprint, construction, water usage, earthquake risk and light pollution interferes with the
wildlife that is vital to the local ecosystem and which is an actual attraction already enjoyed by a majority of it's citizens,
tourists and those of us who work to preserve and encourage these animals to be part of our neighborhood. The
"wellness" activities the developer touts as "amenities" for an exclusive membership are already being enjoyed in our
beautiful town within the natural landscape.
123
2
According to an article on surfer.com and Wired magazine: the Surf Ranch in Lemoore is filled with 15 million gallons of
UV-and-chlorine-treated water — 250,000 of which can evaporate from the lagoon on an extremely hot day"
the article goes on to say "even if surf parks continue to find increasingly creative ways to mitigate their environmental
impact, you cannot build anything without at least some degree of impact."
We love the desert, we love La Quinta and we don't need a surf park. Please do not approve the rezoning application.
Thank you for you time and compassion.
Nancy French
124
125
126
1
Tania Flores
From:Consulting Planner
Sent:Tuesday, April 5, 2022 5:17 PM
To:Tania Flores
Cc:Cheri Flores
Subject:Fw: N0 to the Wave
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: 1waggytale
Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2022 10:48 AM
To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick
<kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>;
Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro
<dcastro@laquintaca.gov>
Subject: N0 to the Wave
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Please save our water and nature as well as our peaceful neighborhood.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
127
1
Tania Flores
From:Scott Moore
Sent:Monday, April 4, 2022 2:19 PM
To:Planning WebMail
Subject:Coral Mountain Project
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Dear Planning Committee,
I just wanted to thank you for all of the due diligence that has been conducted for the Coral Mountain Project. I am very
hopeful that this project will be underway later this year. I truly believe this project will have a very positive impact on
the community of La Quinta. I am an investor and future home owner once this project is completed. I can't wait to be
able to take my family to this amazing venue and teach my kids how to surf one of the most perfect waves in the
world. I have had the honor of surfing the Kelly Slater Wave Ranch up north and it's something I will never
forget. Having this in our backyard is going to create some long lasting memories.
My family and I are also members of The Madison Club and frequent our family house there. Having access to some of
the best golf resorts and now a surfing resort is a dream come true. I hope this next meeting we can finally answer all of
the questions being asked and receive some good news with approval to start the creation of this magical surf resort.
Thank you again for your time and consideration for this project.
Scott Moore
Executive Vice President of Ops and Env, Safety and Health
O 714-283-9990 x1168
C 714-809-7090
E scott.moore@atirestoration.com
ATI Restoration, LLC
Essential Service Provider - 24-Hour Response
3360 East La Palma Ave.
Anaheim, CA 92806
ATIrestoration.com
This message originates from the employee of ATI Restoration LLC. identified as the sender and may contain confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are
not the intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify us immediately at 800‐400‐9353, and please delete this message from your system and destroy any hard
copy you may have printed. Any unauthorized reading, distribution, copying, or other use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. All personal messages express solely the
sender's views and not those of ATI Restoration LLC. This message may not be copied or distributed without this disclaimer.
128
1
Tania Flores
From:Consulting Planner
Sent:Monday, April 4, 2022 8:12 AM
To:Tania Flores
Cc:Cheri Flores
Subject:Fw: COMMENT: Coral Mountain Resort - Water plan falls far short of what Delta needs,
environmentalists say - RENDINO
Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Monika Radeva <mradeva@laquintaca.gov>
Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2022 8:29 PM
To: Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>
Subject: COMMENT: Coral Mountain Resort ‐ Water plan falls far short of what Delta needs, environmentalists say ‐
RENDINO
Forwarding for the record. Thank you.
Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253
Tel: (760) 777-7035
MRadeva@laquintaca.gov
From: Teresa Thompson <Tthompson@laquintaca.gov>
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2022 9:52 AM
To:
Cc: Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Monika Radeva <mradeva@laquintaca.gov>
Subject: COMMENT: Coral Mountain Resort ‐ Water plan falls far short of what Delta needs, environmentalists say ‐
RENDINO
Please see reply to your comments from City Manager Jon McMillen:
Dear Mr. Rendino,
Thank you for your email to the Members of the La Quinta City Council. Your email has been
forwarded to me as City Manager. Please be advised that California law and the La Quinta
Municipal Code set forth processes under which land use applications are governed. Generally
speaking, these processes extend from U.S. and State constitutional provisions that entitle persons
129
2
and property owners to due process of law and use of real property, subject to the valid exercise
of the City’s police powers governing land use and its regulatory review.
The land use applications for the Coral Mountain project, like any other land use applications, are
entitled to the review processes. Moreover, the proponents of these land use applications are
subject to the regulatory review process as would be other similarly-situated projects. The
regulatory review process includes, but is not necessarily limited to, the review processes and
requirements set forth in the State Planning and Zoning Law (Gov. Code, § 65000 et seq.), the
State Subdivision Map Act (Gov. Code, § 66410 et seq.), the California Environmental Quality Act
(Pub. Resources Code, §21000 et seq.), and the applicable provisions set forth in State Regulations
and Title 9 [Zoning] and Title 13 [Subdivision Regulations] of the La Quinta Municipal Code
(among other provisions). Because the law entitles all interested persons, including property
owners and members of the public, to participate in the land use review processes, the City of La
Quinta and its Council are committed to ensuring these processes are followed and respected.
Your email and comments are appreciated. They will be added to the record of communications
received for consideration by the City Council. As explained above, the land use processes must
be followed, which means that the Coral Mountain project applications will first be reviewed by the
City’s Planning Commission for a recommendation to be provided to the City Council. Upon the
completion of the Planning Commission’s review and recommendation, a duly noticed public
hearing and consideration of the project may then be brought before the City Council.
I hope this is helpful. Thank you for reaching out to the Council and providing your comments.
Sincerely,
Jon McMillen | City Manager
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico ◦ La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov
www.laquintaca.gov
Begin forwarded message:
From: Dan Rendino Gmail
Date: March 30, 2022 at 1:51:12 PM PDT
To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>, Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>, John
Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>, Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>
Subject: Water plan falls far short of what Delta needs, environmentalists say
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution
when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
These articles are from today’s Desert Sun. It makes no sense to put this in the middle of a desert in the
middle of a drought for our town to even consider the Coral Mountain Wave Fiasco. Please do not
permit and kill this clown act. The optics of this is just terrible!
130
131
132
133
1
Tania Flores
From:Tom McDaniel
Sent:Tuesday, April 5, 2022 10:31 AM
To:Planning WebMail
Subject:Coral Mountain Resort Project Letter of Support
Attachments:Coral Mountain Project 4-5-22.pdf
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Tom McDaniel , La Quinta California
Attached below is my updated letter of support.
134
La Quinta City Council and Planning Commission
My name is Tom McDaniel. Our La Quinta home is located in PGA West at
.
I plan to cover my comments tonight in two sections. First, our reasons for
supporting the Coral Mountain Resort project and the second my observations
regarding the Environmental Impact Report.
We have owned our home in PGA West for the past 22 years. We have been full
golf and tennis members at PGA West during this time and I have also been a
member of The Quarry for the past 10 years.
Our home is on the fourth fairway of they Nick Private course. We face the
mountains which are illuminated every night for at least 30 years. We and others
along this stretch of Riviera consider the illumination a plus and it certainly hasn’t
adversely impacted the Big Horn Sheep population since we frequently have a
herd of up 30 Big Horn Sheep grazing off our back patio.
We are also a couple of hundred yards from Lake Cahuilla and have lived
compatibly with the occasional outburst from the Riverside County Law
Enforcement Firing Range and the various the sounds associated with marathons
and ancillary Coachella and Stage Coach events held at the Park and as well as the
American Express golf tournament and concerts.
We don’t find the sounds from these events excessive or detracting from our
desert home experience.
Why support a wave pool as part of the Coral Mountain Resort?
Our main home is in Huntington Beach, AKA Surf City USA, where my wife and I
have lived for over forty years .
The family has now grown to 10. My wife and I, our two married children and four
Grandkids. Our family members are all active in golf, tennis and notably surfing.
135
Our second and third generation families all see surfing and health/fitness as a
desired component of their recreational options.
Our son in law is a former professional surfer and remains very active in the surf
industry. He currently coaches past US Open surfing champion Courtney Conlogue
as well as other up and coming young surfers.
He is a key contributor to the California Board Riders Association and founder of
the nonprofit Operation Open Water whose mission is to address the physical and
mental health challenges of our first responders….military, police and fire through
surfing and other ocean/water based programs. Coral Mountain would be a great
facility to support this program.
He has been to the Kelly Slater wave pool in the Central Valley of California many
times as a surfer and coach and is very familiar with its operation.
In short, we have a deep knowledge of the surf community and industry. We can
attest that the surfing culture of today is health and fitness oriented and multi-
generational. The surf business is large and global in scope. The sport has far
outgrown early images that were far from flattering.
Why is a wave pool of interest to the surfing community?…predictability.
In the ocean, waves are unpredictable…sometimes flat and the wait time can be
bone chilling and excruciating. Sometimes too big and very dangerous and when
conditions are perfect you are competing with many other surfers to catch a
single wave.
Competitive surf events, such as the US Open of Surfing, may or may not have
competitive wave conditions.
With the wave pool you have predictability and will always get a great wave to
test and perfect your abilities and the wave is all yours!!! It also takes the risk out
of hosting competitive surf events. A real plus in the surf and related industry
support of surfing events.
136
I have met with the Coral Mountain Project developers on several occasions to
get a full review of the project scope. To be clear, I have no financial interest in
the project or with the developers.
The family has stayed at a resort they developed in Big Sky Montana several
times and it is an outstanding development.
I am satisfied that their design concept is sound, their diligence comprehensive
and professionally done.
I truly believe that the private upscale nature of the Coral Mountain project will
be a welcome addition to the community and diversify the type of recreation and
lifestyle options beyond a strictly golf oriented environment.
I know my family is excited about the multi-generational recreational options that
Coral Mountain will bring to La Quinta.
Comments on the Environmental Impact Report
I have more than 50 years of experience in developing, permitting, constructing
and operating energy projects both in the US and internationally.
Preparing and gaining approvals of environmental impact reports and mitigation
measures was an important element of the many projects developed during my
tenure as the CEO of a global developer and operator of all forms of power
generation and as a Director of a leading manufacturer and developer of utility
scale, commercial and residential solar and energy storage systems.
I have reviewed the final Environmental Impact Report for the Coral Mountain
Resort development prepared under the direction of the City of La Quinta and
assisted/reviewed by many consultants and agencies that are experts in their
fields.
I found the environmental impact assessment and mitigation measures for the
five key impact areas of the Coral Mountain Resort: 1)resort generated light and
glare, 2) biological resources, 3)water resources, 4) noise and 5)traffic to be
comprehensive, thorough and balanced.
137
I also reviewed the extensive list of comments touching on the key impact areas
and the responses to concerns raised by agencies and individuals who reviewed
the final EIR.I found the responses from the planning staff to be thoughtful and
compelling. The Staff conclusion that the Coral Mountain project with mitigations
would be of minimal environmental impact is amply supported by their
exhaustive review.
The drought in California is a relevant concern. I found the developer’s review of
the extensive water conservation efforts designed into the project to be
comprehensive and responsive to effective water conservation. Compared to the
older developments such as PGA West and Andalusia, Coral Mountain, even with
the wave pool will be a model for efficient water usage. If there are water
constraints in the future, it would seem logical to first look to older less efficient
developments to reduce their wasteful usage.
Since I live close to the project, I understand why noise is of particular concern to
many.
It is relevant and important that the consultants reviewing this area had access to
an existing working wave pool at Surf Ranch and could get real time data to
populate their models which utilize advanced mapping techniques that take into
consideration the character and topography surrounding the Coral Mountain
project.
The resulting conclusion of this work was that noise levels from the projects
operations and event plans were not significant and fall within City regulations,
requirements and oversight which I support.
I would also like to address another area that is briefly mentioned in the report.
The California Energy Commission recently unanimously approved updated Title
24 energy efficiency standards for new homes and commercial buildings. These
updated standards will take effect on January 1, 2023.
New homes are still required to have roof top solar and now be “energy storage
ready” and also include building elements to accommodate new energy efficiency
138
technologies, an area that I am quite familiar with. Similar standards will also
apply to commercial buildings including hotels.
The Coral Mountain Resort project will be required to meet Title 24 standards.
Thus, the project will be one of the most energy efficient and environmentally
friendly developments in the area.
In summary, I reiterate my support for the Coral Mountain project because it
expands the lifestyle choices within the city, the environmental impact with
mitigation plans is minimal. I also believe the economic and lifestyle benefits to
La Quinta and its residents will positive and sustainable. The City Planning
Commission should vote in favor of the Coral Mountain Project.
Respectfully,
Tom McDaniel
139
Tania Flores
From:Kasey Suryan
Sent:Tuesday, April 5, 2022 12:12 PM
To:Planning WebMail
Cc:Tara Bravo
Subject:Coral Mountain
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
La Quinta Planning Commission,
I am reaching out in regards to the proposed Coral Mountain Development. This would be an incredible project for the
City and has my full support. For the following reasons, I hope that Council approves the project:
1.Revenue – This project will produce a great deal of property tax, sales tax, TOT, and fee revenue for the City.
2.Cutting Edge – This project will likely be on the world stage as it will have the most advanced artificial wave on
the planet. Thus, the project will garner attention from surfers across the globe and put La Quinta “on the map”
so to speak. This will have a tremendous trickle effect through the city is the most positive ways.
3.Demand / Trends – Baby boomers are aging and the younger and more health‐conscious generations are
exploring more active less traditional hobbies. That is why surfing is growing at such a rapid pace. This type of
project is the “wave of the future” (no pun intended!).
4.Sustainability – The development will use less water and make a smaller carbon footprint, given the green
energy program, than a similarly sized golf/tennis club.
5.Developer – I have researched the team putting the project together, and their projects have all been “first
class” in nature.
For the aforementioned reasons, this project will be a huge positive for both the City and it’s residents. It will bring
healthy and exciting attention to the City, pushing home values for current residents and sustainable growth for future
generations.
Thank you,
Kasey
Kasey Suryan | Managing Partner
4901 Birch St | Newport Beach CA 92660
T 949-838-1272
W www.lyonliving.com
Confidentiality Statement:
This email and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential information and trade secrets of Lyon Living and / or its subsidiaries and
affiliates. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution, or use
140
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 2
City of La Quinta
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: April 12, 2022
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA TITLE: ADOPT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SITE DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT 2021-0008 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005 FOR 50
RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON 26.12 ACRES; CEQA: DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH EA 2003-
483; LOCATION: NORTH OF AVENUE 60, EAST OF MADISON STREET, AND
WEST OF MONROE STREET
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution to approve Site Development Permit 2021-0008 and
Tentative Tract Map 2021-0005 (TTM 38188) subject to the Findings and
Conditions of Approval and find the project consistent with previously adopted
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2003-483.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
•The proposed project consists of applications for a Site Development
Permit (SDP) for the architecture and landscaping of the units and
adjacent areas and a Tentative Tract Map (TTM) to subdivide 26.12 acres
into 50 residential lots and 6 street and open space lots within a portion
of the Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan (Attachment 1).
•In order to approve the project, the Planning Commission must make
findings relating to architectural design, site design, landscape design,
and for the project’s consistency with the zoning, General Plan and
Subdivision Map Act (Attachment 2).
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The Andalusia at Coral Mountain project was originally approved by the City
Council on December 16, 2003, as General Plan Amendment 2003-093, Zone
Change 2003-116, Specific Plan 2003-067 (Coral Mountain Specific Plan
Amendment 2), and Environmental Assessment 2003-483. The development
plan included two golf courses and club amenities, 1,400 residential units and
supporting infrastructure. A total of four (4) amendments to the Specific Plan
have been approved, with Amendment No. 5 currently under City consideration
141
for the Wave at Coral Mountain Project. Amendment No. 5 would not affect this
project currently proposed.
The applicant is requesting SDP approval for the architecture and landscaping
of the units and adjacent areas and TTM approval to subdivide 26.12 acres into
50 residential lots and 6 street and open space lots within a portion of the
Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan (Attachment 3).
Site Development Permit
Architectural Design
The applicant is proposing a total of seven (7) different plan types, each with
three (3) different elevations (Attachment 4). Total building square footage
(sf), which includes garages, patios, and porches, ranges from 3,476 sf to
7,050 sf. The floor plans range in size from 2,315 square feet (sf) of livable
area to 5,108 sf of livable area. Every plan type uses three (3) different
elevations: Modern Mediterranean, Desert Contemporary, and Spanish
Transitional and incorporate s-tile roofing, smooth stucco, and decorative tiles
(Attachment 5). These architectural styles are consistent with the homes in the
rest of the project and within the subject Specific Plan.
The building meets all development standards of the underlying Low Density
Residential (RDL) zone and subject Specific Plan. As noted in the floor plans for
each plan type, every plan will have an optional Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)
as part of the homes. A minimum of four (4) of the lots will require ADUs as
part of the Conditions of Approval in order to keep the underlying density at 2
units per acre. These additional four units ensure the project is consistent with
Government Code section 65863, commonly referred to as the “no Net Loss”
requirement and with the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, Government Code Section
66300.
Site Design
The project is located on the south part of Andalusia, just north of Avenue 60
and east of Madison Street. This project fits into the overall master planned
area of Andalusia as a subsequent phase of the project. The rest of the
planned homes within Andalusia will require additional Site Development
Permits and Tentative Tract Maps.
Landscaping
The landscaping for the project consists of desert and drought-tolerant plants
(Attachment 4, Page L-1). The plan palette incorporates typical desert
compatible species, such as Acacia trees, along with shrubs such as Dwarf
Bottlebrush and Blue Emu Bush. The plans identify all trees as 36” box trees.
142
Tentative Tract Map
The Applicant is proposing TTM approval to subdivide 26.12 acres into 50
residential lots and 6 street and open space lots (Attachment 6). The map will
subdivide the lots to be surrounded by existing golf course, lakes, and newly
constructed streets.
Staff has reviewed and ensured consistency with the Subdivision Map Act per
the findings (Attachment 2), subject to Conditions of Approval.
AGENCY AND PUBLIC REVIEW
Public Agency Review
The applications were distributed to City staff and outside agencies. All written
comments received 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 April 1, 2022, and
mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site. No written comments
have been received as of the date of this writing. Any written comments
received will be handed out at the Planning Commission hearing.
FINDINGS
In order to approve the project, the Planning Commission must make findings
relating to architectural design, site design, landscape design, CEQA
compliance, and for the project’s consistency with the zoning and General Plan.
(Attachment 2 – SDP and TTM findings)
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Design and Development Department has determined that the proposed
project is consistent with the analysis previously approved for the project in
EA2003-483. No further environmental review is required under the CEQA.
Prepared by: Carlos Flores, Senior Planner
Approved by: Danny Castro, Design and Development Director
Attachments: 1.Project Information
2.TTM and SDP Findings
3. Vicinity Map
4.Site Development Permit Plan Set
5.Materials Board
6.Tentative Tract Map 2021-0005
143
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP FOR FIFTY RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITHIN
THE ANDALUSIA DEVELOPMENT, AND FINDING
THE PROJECT CONSISTENT WITH
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-483
CASE NUMBERS: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005 (TTM 38188)
APPLICANT: SUNRISE LQ, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California did, on April 12, 2022, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to
consider a request by Sunrise LQ, LLC. for approval of the Andalusia
development, generally located north of Avenue 60, east of Madison Street,
within the Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan, more particularly
described as:
APNs: 764-210-017, -19, -030
WHEREAS, the Design and Development Department published a
public hearing notice in The Desert Sun newspaper on April 1, 2022, as
prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to
all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and
Site Development Permit 2021-0008
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be
heard, said City Council 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 General Plan
The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan land
use designation of Low Density Residential. The City’s General Plan
policies relating to low density residential encourage a full range of
single-family residential units within the City, and the proposed use
144
Planning Commission Resolution 2022 -
Site Development Permit 2021-0008
Tentative Tract Map 2021-0005
Andalusia Tract 38188
Adopted:
Page 2 of 5
maintains those policies. The project, as conditioned, is required to
add a minimum of four (4) Accessory Dwelling Units within the
project, making the project reach a total of at least 54 units. With
this requirement, the project goes above the 2 units per acre
density requirement in the underlying land use. With the minimum
of four (4) additional units, the project meets all requirements in
density within the gross area of the project. The project is
consistent with Government Code section 65863, commonly
referred to as the “no Net Loss” requirement and with the Housing
Criss Act of 2019, Government Code Section 66300.
2.Consistency with Zoning Code
The proposed development, as conditioned, is consistent with the
development standards of the City’s Zoning Code and Andalusia at
Coral Mountain Specific Plan in terms of architectural style and
landscaping. The project, as conditioned, is required to add a
minimum of four (4) Accessory Dwelling Units within the project,
making the project reach a total of at least 54 units. With this
requirement, the project goes above the 2 units per acre density
requirement in the underlying land use. With the minimum of four
(4) additional units, the project meets all requirements in density
within the gross area of the project and does not decrease intensity
of the land use. Government Code 663.00. The project is
consistent with Government Code section 65863, commonly
referred to as the “no Net Loss” requirement and with the Housing
Criss Act of 2019, Government Code Section 66300.
3.Compliance with CEQA
The Design and Development Department has determined that this
project has been accounted for in and is consistent with
Environmental Assessment 2003-483 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 existing surrounding commercial land uses,
and is consistent with the development standards in the Municipal
Code. The units are concluded to be appropriate for the proposed
locations, and supplemental design elements appropriately enhance
the architecture of the buildings. The architecture and layout of the
145
Planning Commission Resolution 2022 -
Site Development Permit 2021-0008
Tentative Tract Map 2021-0005
Andalusia Tract 38188
Adopted:
Page 3 of 5
project is compatible with Specific Plan 2003-067 and subsequent
amendments.
5.Site Design
The site design of the project is compatible with surrounding
development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city.
6.Landscape Design
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
project landscaping for the proposed buildings, as conditioned, shall
unify and enhance visual continuity of the proposed residential units
with the surrounding development. Landscape improvements are
designed and sized to provide visual appeal. The permanent overall
site landscaping utilizes various tree and shrub species to enhance
the building architecture.
Tentative Tract Map 2021-0005 (TTM 38188)
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be
heard, the Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings
to justify approval of said Tentative Tract Map:
1.Tentative Tract Map 38188 is consistent with the La Quinta General
Plan, and subject Specific Plan as proposed. The Tract Map is
consistent with the Low Density Residential land use designation as
set forth in the General Plan, and as set forth in Specific Plan 2003-
067 and subsequent amendments.
2.The design and improvement of Tentative Tract Map 38188 is
consistent with the La Quinta General Plan, and Specific Plan 2003-
067 and subsequent amendments with the implementation of
recommended conditions of approval to ensure consistency for the
homes proposed on the lots created herein. The project density is
consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 2003-
067 and subsequent amendment and is comparable to surrounding
residential development. The project, as conditioned, is required to
add a minimum of four (4) Accessory Dwelling Units within the
146
Planning Commission Resolution 2022 -
Site Development Permit 2021-0008
Tentative Tract Map 2021-0005
Andalusia Tract 38188
Adopted:
Page 4 of 5
project, making the project reach a total of at least 54 units. With
this requirement, the project goes above the 2 units per acre
density requirement in the underlying land use. With the minimum
of four (4) additional units, the project meets all requirements in
density within the gross area of the project. The project is
consistent with Government Code section 65863, commonly
referred to as the “no Net Loss” requirement and with the Housing
Criss Act of 2019, Government Code Section 66300.
3.The design of Tentative Tract Map 38188 and proposed
improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage, nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or
their habitat. The Design and Development Director has determined
that this project has been accounted for in and is consistent with
Environmental Assessment 2003-483 and no further environmental
review is required.
4.The design of Tentative Tract Map 38188 and type of improvements
are not likely to cause serious public health problems, insofar as the
project will be required to comply with all laws, standards and
requirements associated with sanitary sewer collection, water
quality and other public health issues.
5.The design and improvements required for Tentative Tract Map
38188 will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at
large, for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision. All roadway improvements, easements, if any and
surrounding improvements will be completed to City standards.
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; and
SECTION 2. That the above project be determined by the Planning
Commission to be consistent with Environmental Assessment 2003-483; and
147
Planning Commission Resolution 2022 -
Site Development Permit 2021-0008
Tentative Tract Map 2021-0005
Andalusia Tract 38188
Adopted:
Page 5 of 5
SECTION 3. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2021-
0008 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval [Exhibit A];and
SECTION 4. That it does hereby approve Tentative Tract Map 2021-0005 for
the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval [Exhibit B].
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
City of La Quinta Planning Commission, held on April 12, 2022, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_________________________________
STEPHEN NIETO, Chairperson
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
_______________________________________________
DANNY CASTRO, Design and Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
148
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022- EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
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.
Site Development Permit 2021-0008 shall comply with all applicable
conditions and/or mitigation measures for the following related approval:
Tentative Parcel Map 38188
Specific Plan 2003-067
General Plan Amendment 2003-093
Zone Change 2003-116
Environmental Assessment 2003-483
2.This Site Development Permit shall expire on April 12, 2024, and shall
become null and void in accordance with Municipal Code Section
9.200.080, unless the required ministerial permits have been issued. A
time extension may be requested per LQMC Section 9.200.080
3.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.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:
•Riverside County Fire Marshal
•La Quinta Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Green Sheet
(Public Works Clearance) for Building Permits, Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP) Exemption Form – Whitewater River
Region, Improvement Permit)
•Design & Development Department
•Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
•Coachella Valley Unified School District
149
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 2 of 20
•Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
•Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
•California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
•State Water Resources Control Board
•SunLine Transit Agency
•SCAQMD Coachella Valley
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. 2009-0009-DWQ and 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.
150
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 3 of 20
B. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for
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 on an Erosion Control Plan
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.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
151
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 4 of 20
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
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 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.
11.The applicant shall offer for dedication all public 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.
12.The applicant shall retain for private use 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.
13.The private street rights-of-way to be retained for private use required
for this development include:
A. PRIVATE STREETS
1)Lots C, D, and E - Private Residential Streets shall have a
minimum 40-foot travel width. The travel width may be
reduced to 32 feet with parking restricted to one side, and 28
feet if on-street parking is prohibited.
152
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 5 of 20
2)Lots F and G – 26 feet private Residential Streets with on-
street parking prohibited.
Property line shall be placed at the back of curb similar to the lay
out shown on the (preliminary grading plan/tentative map) and the
typical street section shown in the tentative map. Use of smooth
curves instead of angular lines at property lines is recommended.
14.Right-of-way geometry for standard knuckles and property line corner
cut-backs at curb returns shall conform to Riverside County Standard
Drawings #801, and #805, respectively, unless otherwise approved by
the City Engineer.
15.When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed
street rights-of-way shown on the approved Site Development Permit are
necessary prior to approval of the improvements dedicating such rights-
of-way, the applicant shall grant the necessary rights-of-way within 60
days of a written request by the City.
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. 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.
18.The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over
any portion of the subject property after the date of approval of the Site
Development Permit unless such easement is approved by the City
Engineer.
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.
153
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 6 of 20
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 restored to standard curb height prior to final inspection
of permanent building(s) on the lot.
21.The applicant shall construct the following street improvements:
A. OFF-SITE STREETS
1)Madison Street:
a.Construct the perimeter improvements on Madison
Street fronting Andalusia (Tract Map 31681) between
Avenue 58 and Avenue 60. These improvements shall
include 6-foot wide meandering sidewalk and parkway
landscaping.
A. PRIVATE STREETS
1)Lots C, D, E, F, and G – Construct internal streets per the
approved lay-out shown on the tentative map and/or as
approved by the City Engineer. Private Residential Streets
shall have a minimum 40-foot travel width. The travel width
may be reduced to 32 feet with parking restricted to one
side, and 28 feet if on-street parking is prohibited and
provided there is adequate off-street parking for residents
and visitors. Lots F and G can be 26 feet private Residential
Streets with on-street parking prohibited. The applicant shall
establish provisions for ongoing enforcement of the parking
restriction in the CC&R’s. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed and
approved by the Design and Development Department prior
to recordation.
2)The location of driveways of corner lots shall not be located
within the curb return and away from the intersection when
possible.
3)Construct 24-foot emergency access and residence egress
154
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 7 of 20
road as shown on the preliminary grading plan/tentative
map.
B. PRIVATE CUL DE SACS
1)Shall be constructed according to the lay-out shown on the
preliminary grading plan, except for minor revisions as may
be required by the City Engineer.
22.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).
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.
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.Improvements shall include 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.
26.Standard knuckles and corner cut-backs shall conform to Riverside
County Standard Drawings #801 and #805, respectively, unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
27.Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City
155
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 8 of 20
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 engineers
registered in California.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
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.
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 Public Works 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 Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan
1" = 40' Horizontal, 1"= 4'
Vertical
B. PM-10 Plan 1” = 40’ Horizontal
C. Erosion Control Plan 1” = 40’ Horizontal
D. WQMP (Plan submitted in Report Form)
NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently
(Separate Storm Drain Plans if applicable)
E. On-Site Residential Precise Grading Plan 1" = 30'
Horizontal
156
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 9 of 20
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 Precise Grading” plan is required to be submitted for approval
by the Building Official, Planning Manager and the City Engineer.
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 City
Engineer.
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.
“On-Site Precise Grading Plan” 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 accessible requirements.
30.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 Public Works
home page and look for the Standard Drawings hyperlink.
31.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 (EOR) 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"
157
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 10 of 20
conditions, the EOR may submit a letter attesting to said fact to the City
Engineer in lieu of mylar submittal.
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS
32.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.
33.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
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 approval of
the Final Map, or the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse
the City for the costs of such improvements.
34.If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the
158
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 11 of 20
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.
35.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
36.The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.050
(Grading Improvements).
37.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.
38.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. An Erosion Control Plan with Best Management Practices prepared
in accordance with LQMC Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES
Stormwater Discharge Permit and Storm Management and
159
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 12 of 20
Discharge Controls).
E. A Final 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.
39.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.
40.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 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.
41.Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City
Engineer’s approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the
preliminary grading plan, unless the pad elevations have other
requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval.
42.The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the
160
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 13 of 20
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.
43.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 Site Development Permit Preliminary
Grading Plan, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to
the City Engineer for a substantial conformance review.
44.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.
DRAINAGE
45.Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and
drainage report for Andalusia, Tract Map 31681. Nuisance water shall be
disposed of in an approved manner.
46.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.
47.Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be
161
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 14 of 20
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.
48.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.
49.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.
50.No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless
approved by the Design and Development Director and the City Engineer.
51.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.
52.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).
53.The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood
boundaries and levels in any area outside the development.
54.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.
55.Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be
received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream
162
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 15 of 20
drainage relief route.
56.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 and the
State Water Resources Control Board’s Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ and
Order No. 2010-0014-DWQ.
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.
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
57.The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110
(Utilities).
58.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
163
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 16 of 20
placement for practical and aesthetic purposes.
59.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.
60.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
61.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.
LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION
62.The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping
Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans).
63.The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks,
retention basins, and common lots.
64.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).
65.The applicant shall submit final landscape plans for review, processing
and approval to the Design and Development Department, in accordance
164
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 17 of 20
with the Final Landscape Plan application process. Design and
Development Director approval of the final landscape plans is required
prior to issuance of the first building permit unless the Director
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 Design and Development Director.
Prior to final approval of the installation of landscaping, the Landscape
Architect of record shall provide the Design and Development Department
a letter stating he/she has personally inspected the installation and that it
conforms with the final landscaping plans as approved by the City.
If staff determines during final landscaping inspection that adjustments
are required in order to meet the intent of the Planning Commission’s
approval, the Design and Development Director shall review and approve
any such revisions to the landscape plan.
MAINTENANCE
66.The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.160
(Maintenance).
67.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
68.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).
69.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.
70.A minimum of four (4) lots within this project area must include an
165
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 18 of 20
Accessory Dwelling Unit. Final occupancy on final lot shall not occur if
four (4) accessory dwelling units have not been established within
project.
71.Fire Hydrants and Fire Flow: Provide water system plans to show there
exists or proposed improvements of fire hydrant(s) capable of delivering
the minimum fire flow, per CFC Appendix B Table B105.1 and Table
B105.2 as amended by LQMC, within 400 feet to all portions around the
proposed structure. Minimum fire hydrant location and spacing shall
comply with the CFC and NFPA 24. Reference 2019 California Fire Code
(CFC) 507.5.1.
A. Transportation Hydrants: Where new water mains are extended
along streets where hydrants are not needed for protection of
structures or similar fire problems, fire hydrants shall be provided
at spacing not to exceed 1,000 feet to provide for transportation
hazards. (CFC Table C102.1 ft nt c.)
72.Tract Water Plans: Applicant/developer shall provide plans of the Public
Water System supplying on-site fire hydrants to the Office of the Fire
Marshal for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. Plans
shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, and shall confirm hydrant
type, location, spacing, and minimum fire flow by detail of hydraulic
calculations to the most remote/demanding service. Once previously
approved plans are signed and approved by the local water authority, A
copy of the plans shall be provided to the Office of the Fire Marshal for
department record filing. Ref. CFC 105.4.1
A. 3-feet clearance: Fire hydrants and other Fire Protection Equipment
shall be provided with a minimum 3-feet radius clearance around
the circumference of the device. (CFC 507.5.5, 509.2.1 & 912.4.2)
73.Fire Department Access: Provide a site plan for fire apparatus access
roads and signage. Access roads shall be provided to within 150 feet to
all portions of all buildings and shall have an unobstructed width of not
less than 24-feet exclusive of curb-side parking, bike lanes and other
roadway features. The construction of the access roads shall be all
weather and capable of sustaining 40,000 lbs. over two axles for areas of
residential development and 60,000 lbs. over two axels for commercial
developments. Ref. CFC 503.1.1 and 503.2.1 as amended by the City of
166
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 19 of 20
La Quinta.
A. Fire Lane marking: Identification and marking of fire lanes,
including curb details and signage shall be in compliance with
Riverside County Fire Department Standards.
B. A Secondary Emergency Access and Residence Egress Road has
been accepted for use during the development of this Tract and
phase. The road element shall be maintained by the developer, and
inspected regularly in compliance with the submitted Road
Maintenance Plan on file.
74.Requests for installation of traffic calming designs/devices on fire
apparatus access roads shall be submitted and approved by the Office of
the Fire Marshal. Ref. CFC 503.4.1
75.Grading Permit Fire Department Review: Submittal to the Office of the
Fire Marshal for Precise Grading Permit will be required.
76.Construction Permits Fire Department Review: Submittal of construction
plans to the Office of the Fire Marshal for development, construction,
installation and operational use permitting will be required. Final fire and
life safety conditions will be addressed when the Office of the Fire Marshal
reviews these plans. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use,
California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code, and related codes,
which are in effect at the time of building plan submittal.
77.Phased Construction Access: If construction is phased, each phase shall
provide approved access for fire protection prior to any construction. Ref.
CFC 503.1
78.Residential Fire Sprinklers: Residential fire sprinklers are required in all
one and two-family dwellings per the California Residential Code (CRC).
Plans must be submitted to the Office of the Fire Marshal for review and
approval prior to installation. Ref. CRC 313.2
79.Knox Box and Gate Access: All electronically operated gates shall be
provided with Knox key switches and automatic sensors for access. Ref.
CFC 506.1
80.Addressing: All residential dwellings shall display street numbers in a
167
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 20 of 20
prominent location on the street side of the residence. All commercial
buildings shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the
address side and additional locations as required. Ref. CFC 505.1 and
County of Riverside Office of the Fire Marshal Standard #07-01
81.Conditions Timeframe: Conditions of approval are subject to change with
adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are
not obtained within twelve months.
168
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022- EXHIBIT B
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 1 of 21
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 Tentative Tract Map, 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.This Tentative Tract Map, and any Final Map recorded thereunder, shall
comply with the requirements and standards of Government Code §§
66410 through 66499.58 (the “Subdivision Map Act”), and Chapter 13 of
the La Quinta Municipal Code (“LQMC”).
The City of La Quinta’s Municipal Code can be accessed on the City’s Web
Site at www.laquintaca.gov.
3.Tentative Parcel Map 38188 shall comply with all applicable conditions
and/or mitigation measures for the following related approval:
Site Development Permit 2021-0008
Specific Plan 2003-067
General Plan Amendment 2003-093
Zone Change 2003-116
Environmental Assessment 2003-483
4.The Tentative Tract Map shall expire on April 12, 2025, and shall become
null and void in accordance with La Quinta Municipal Code Section
13.12.150. A time extension may be requested per LQMC Section
13.12.160.
5.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:
•Riverside County Fire Marshal
169
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 2 of 21
•La Quinta Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Green Sheet
(Public Works Clearance) for Building Permits, Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP) Exemption Form – Whitewater River
Region, Improvement Permit)
•Design & Development Department
•Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
•Coachella Valley Unified School District
•Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
•Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
•California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
•State Water Resources Control Board
•SunLine Transit Agency
•SCAQMD Coachella Valley
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.
6.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.
7.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. 2009-0009-DWQ and 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
170
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 3 of 21
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
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 on an Erosion Control Plan
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.
8.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
171
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 4 of 21
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.
9.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
10.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.
11.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.
12.The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map all public 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.
13.The applicant shall retain for private use on the Final Map 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 private street rights-of-way to be retained for private use required
172
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 5 of 21
for this development include:
A. PRIVATE STREETS
1)Lots C, D, and E - Private Residential Streets shall have a
minimum 40-foot travel width. The travel width may be
reduced to 32 feet with parking restricted to one side, and 28
feet if on-street parking is prohibited.
2)Lots F and G – 26 feet private Residential Streets with on-
street parking prohibited.
Property line shall be placed at the back of curb similar to the lay
out shown on the (preliminary grading plan/tentative map) and the
typical street section shown in the tentative map. Use of smooth
curves instead of angular lines at property lines is recommended.
15.Right-of-way geometry for standard knuckles and property line corner
cut-backs at curb returns shall conform to Riverside County Standard
Drawings #801, and #805, respectively, unless otherwise approved by
the City Engineer.
16.When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed
street rights-of-way shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map are
necessary prior to approval of the Final Map dedicating such rights-of-
way, the applicant shall grant the necessary rights-of-way within 60 days
of a written request by the City.
17.The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map 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.
18.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 on the Final Map.
19.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.
173
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 6 of 21
20.The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over
any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the
Tentative Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless
such easement is approved by the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
21.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.
22.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 restored to standard curb height prior to final inspection of
permanent building(s) on the lot.
23.The applicant shall construct the following street improvements:
A. OFF-SITE STREETS
1)Madison Street:
a.Construct the perimeter improvements on Madison
Street fronting Andalusia (Tract Map 31681) between
Avenue 58 and Avenue 60. These improvements shall
include 6-foot wide meandering sidewalk and parkway
landscaping.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
1)Lots C, D, E, F, and G – Construct internal streets per the
approved lay-out shown on the tentative map and/or as
approved by the City Engineer. Private Residential Streets
shall have a minimum 40-foot travel width. The travel width
may be reduced to 32 feet with parking restricted to one
side, and 28 feet if on-street parking is prohibited and
174
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 7 of 21
provided there is adequate off-street parking for residents
and visitors. Lots F and G can be 26 feet private Residential
Streets with on-street parking prohibited. The applicant shall
establish provisions for ongoing enforcement of the parking
restriction in the CC&R’s. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed and
approved by the Design and Development Department prior
to recordation.
2)The location of driveways of corner lots shall not be located
within the curb return and away from the intersection when
possible.
3)Construct 24-foot emergency access and residence egress
road as shown on the preliminary grading plan/tentative
map.
C. PRIVATE CUL DE SACS
1)Shall be constructed according to the lay-out shown on the
tentative map, except for minor revisions as may be required
by the City Engineer.
24.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).
25.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.
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
26.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
175
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 8 of 21
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.
27.Improvements shall include 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.
28.Standard knuckles and corner cut-backs shall conform to Riverside
County Standard Drawings #801 and #805, respectively, unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
29.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 engineers
registered in California.
FINAL MAPS
30.Prior to the City’s approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish
accurate mylars of the Final Map. The Final Map shall be 1” = 40’ scale.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
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.
31.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).
32.The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for
review and approval by the Public Works 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.
176
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 9 of 21
A. On-Site Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan
1" = 40' Horizontal, 1"= 4'
Vertical
B. PM-10 Plan 1” = 40’ Horizontal
C. Erosion Control Plan 1” = 40’ Horizontal
D. WQMP (Plan submitted in Report Form)
NOTE: A through D to be submitted concurrently
(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.
“On-Site Precise Grading” plan is required to be submitted for approval
by the Building Official, Planning Manager, and the City Engineer.
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 City
Engineer.
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.
“On-Site Precise Grading Plan” 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 accessible requirements.
33.The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction
notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the Public
177
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 10 of 21
Works Development “Plans, Notes and Design Guidance” section of the
City website (www.laquintaca.gov). Please navigate to the Public Works
home page and look for the Standard Drawings hyperlink.
34.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 (EOR) 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 EOR may submit a letter attesting to said fact to the City
Engineer in lieu of mylar submittal.
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS
35.Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all on and
off-site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same or shall furnish
a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement
(“SIA”) guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the
satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination
thereof, as may be required by the City.
36.Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement (“SIA”) entered into by and
between the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of
guaranteeing the completion of any improvements related to this
Tentative Tract Map, shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Chapter
13.28 (Improvement Security).
37.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
178
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 11 of 21
improvements and common on-site improvements (e.g., backbone
utilities, retention basins, perimeter walls, landscaping and gates) shall
be constructed, or secured through a SIA, 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 through a SIA, 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.
38.Depending on the timing of the development of this Tentative Tract Map,
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
reimbursement of its costs by others.
C. Reimburse others for those improvements previously constructed
that are considered to be an obligation of this tentative tract map.
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.
179
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 12 of 21
In the event that any of the improvements required for this development
are constructed by the City, the applicant shall, prior to the approval of
the Final Map, or the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse
the City for the costs of such improvements.
39.If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, 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.
At the time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates
for conditional approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant
shall also submit one copy each of an 8-1/2" x 11" reduction of each
page of the Final Map, along with a copy of an 8-1/2" x 11" Vicinity Map.
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.
40.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
41.The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.050
(Grading Improvements).
42.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.
43.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
180
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 13 of 21
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. An Erosion Control Plan with Best Management Practices 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 Final 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.
A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been
prepared in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953.
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.
44.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.
45.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 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
181
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 14 of 21
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.
46.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.
47.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.
48.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.
49.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.
DRAINAGE
50.Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and
182
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 15 of 21
drainage report for Andalusia, Tract Map 31681. Nuisance water shall be
disposed of in an approved manner.
51.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.
52.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.
53.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.
54. 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.
55.No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless
approved by the Design and Development Director and the City Engineer.
56.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.
57.Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped
setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls
183
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 16 of 21
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).
58.The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood
boundaries and levels in any area outside the development.
59.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.
60.Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be
received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream
drainage relief route.
61.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 and the
State Water Resources Control Board’s Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ and
Order No. 2010-0014-DWQ.
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.
184
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 17 of 21
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
62.The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110
(Utilities).
63.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.
64.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.
65.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
66. 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.
LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION
185
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 18 of 21
67.The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping
Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans).
68.The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks,
retention basins, and common lots.
69.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).
70.The applicant shall submit final landscape plans for review, processing
and approval to the Design and Development Department, in accordance
with the Final Landscape Plan application process. Design and
Development Director approval of the final landscape plans is required
prior to issuance of the first building permit unless the Director
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 Design and Development Director.
Prior to final approval of the installation of landscaping, the Landscape
Architect of record shall provide the Design and Development Department
a letter stating he/she has personally inspected the installation and that it
conforms with the final landscaping plans as approved by the City.
If staff determines during final landscaping inspection that adjustments
are required in order to meet the intent of the Planning Commission’s
approval, the Design and Development Director shall review and approve
any such revisions to the landscape plan.
MAINTENANCE
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
186
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 19 of 21
73.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).
74.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.
75.A minimum of four (4) lots within this project area must include an
Accessory Dwelling Unit. Final occupancy on final lot shall not occur if
four (4) accessory dwelling units have not been established within
project.
76.Adverse Impacts: The proposed project may have a cumulative adverse
impact on the Fire Department's ability to provide an acceptable level of
service. These impacts include an increased number of emergency and
public service calls due to the increased presence of structures, traffic,
and population. The project proponents/developers will be expected to
provide for a proportional mitigation to these impacts via capital
improvements and/or impact fees.
77.Fire Hydrants and Fire Flow: Provide water system plans to show there
exists or proposed improvements of fire hydrant(s) capable of delivering
the minimum fire flow, per CFC Appendix B Table B105.1 and Table
B105.2 as amended by LQMC, within 400 feet to all portions around the
proposed structure. Minimum fire hydrant location and spacing shall
comply with the CFC and NFPA 24. Reference 2019 California Fire Code
(CFC) 507.5.1.
A. Transportation Hydrants: Where new water mains are extended
along streets where hydrants are not needed for protection of
structures or similar fire problems, fire hydrants shall be provided
at spacing not to exceed 1,000 feet to provide for transportation
hazards. (CFC Table C102.1 ft nt c.)
78.Tract Water Plans: Applicant/developer shall provide plans of the Public
Water System supplying on-site fire hydrants to the Office of the Fire
Marshal for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. Plans
shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, and shall confirm hydrant
187
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 20 of 21
type, location, spacing, and minimum fire flow by detail of hydraulic
calculations to the most remote/demanding service. Once previously
approved plans are signed and approved by the local water authority, A
copy of the plans shall be provided to the Office of the Fire Marshal for
department record filing. Ref. CFC 105.4.1
A. 3-feet clearance: Fire hydrants and other Fire Protection Equipment
shall be provided with a minimum 3-feet radius clearance around
the circumference of the device. (CFC 507.5.5, 509.2.1 & 912.4.2)
79.Fire Department Access: Provide a site plan for fire apparatus access
roads and signage. Access roads shall be provided to within 150 feet to
all portions of all buildings and shall have an unobstructed width of not
less than 24-feet exclusive of curb-side parking, bike lanes and other
roadway features. The construction of the access roads shall be all
weather and capable of sustaining 40,000 lbs. over two axles for areas of
residential development and 60,000 lbs. over two axels for commercial
developments. Ref. CFC 503.1.1 and 503.2.1 as amended by the City of
La Quinta.
A. Fire Lane marking: Identification and marking of fire lanes,
including curb details and signage shall be in compliance with
Riverside County Fire Department Standards.
B. A Secondary Emergency Access and Residence Egress Road has
been accepted for use during the development of this Tract and
phase. The road element shall be maintained by the developer, and
inspected regularly in compliance with the submitted Road
Maintenance Plan on file.
80.Requests for installation of traffic calming designs/devices on fire
apparatus access roads shall be submitted and approved by the Office of
the Fire Marshal. Ref. CFC 503.4.1
81.Grading Permit Fire Department Review: Submittal to the Office of the
Fire Marshal for Precise Grading Permit will be required.
82.Construction Permits Fire Department Review: Submittal of construction
plans to the Office of the Fire Marshal for development, construction,
installation and operational use permitting will be required. Final fire and
life safety conditions will be addressed when the Office of the Fire Marshal
188
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2022-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005
PROJECT: ANDALUSIA
ADOPTED:
Page 21 of 21
reviews these plans. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use,
California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code, and related codes,
which are in effect at the time of building plan submittal.
83.Phased Construction Access: If construction is phased, each phase shall
provide approved access for fire protection prior to any construction. Ref.
CFC 503.1
84.Residential Fire Sprinklers: Residential fire sprinklers are required in all
one and two-family dwellings per the California Residential Code (CRC).
Plans must be submitted to the Office of the Fire Marshal for review and
approval prior to installation. Ref. CRC 313.2
85.Knox Box and Gate Access: Buildings shall be provided with a Knox Box.
The Knox Box shall be installed in an accessible location approved by the
Office of the Fire Marshal. All electronically operated gates shall be
provided with Knox key switches and automatic sensors for access. Ref.
CFC 506.1
86.Addressing: All residential dwellings shall display street numbers in a
prominent location on the street side of the residence. All commercial
buildings shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the
address side and additional locations as required. Ref. CFC 505.1 and
County of Riverside Office of the Fire Marshal Standard #07-01
87.Conditions Timeframe: Conditions of approval are subject to change with
adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are
not obtained within twelve months.
189
ATTACHMENT 1
PROJECT INFORMATION
CASE NUMBER: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-0008 AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2021-0005 (TTM 38188)
APPLICANT: SUNRISE
REQUEST: ADOPT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
TO APPROVE 50 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON 26.12 ACRE
SITE
LOCATION: NORTH OF AVENUE 60, EAST OF MADISON STREET,
WEST OF MONROE STREET
CEQA: DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS
DETERMINED THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH EA
2004-483;
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
ZONING
DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/GOLF COURSE
SURROUNDING
ZONING/LAND USES: NORTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/GOLF COURSE
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
SOUTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/GOLF COURSE
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
EAST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/GOLF COURSE
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/GOLF COURSE
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
190
ATTACHMENT 2
1
FINDINGS
Site Development Permit 2021-0008
1.Consistency with General Plan
The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan land
use designation of Low Density Residential. The City’s General Plan
policies relating to low density residential encourage a full range of
single-family residential units within the City, and the proposed use
maintains those policies. The project, as conditioned, is required to
add a minimum of four (4) Accessory Dwelling Units within the
project, making the project reach a total of at least 54 units. With
this requirement, the project goes above the 2 units per acre
requirement in the underlying land use. With the minimum of four
(4) additional units, the project meets all requirements in density
within the gross area of the project. The project is consistent with
Government Code section 65863, commonly referred to as the “no
Net Loss” requirement and with the Housing Criss Act of 2019,
Government Code Section 66300.
2.Consistency with Zoning Code
The proposed development, as conditioned, is consistent with the
development standards of the City’s Zoning Code and Andalusia at
Coral Mountain Specific Plan in terms of architectural style and
landscaping. The project, as conditioned, is required to add a
minimum of four (4) Accessory Dwelling Units within the project,
making the project reach a total of at least 54 units. With this
requirement, the project goes above the 2 units per acre
requirement in the underlying land use. With the minimum of four
(4) additional units, the project meets all requirements in density
within the gross area of the project. The project is consistent with
Government Code section 65863, commonly referred to as the “no
Net Loss” requirement and with the Housing Criss Act of 2019,
Government Code Section 66300.
3.Compliance with CEQA
The Design and Development Department has determined that this
project has been accounted for in and is consistent with
Environmental Assessment 2003-483 and no further environmental
review is required.
191
The architecture and layout of the project is compatible with, and
not detrimental to, the existing surrounding commercial land uses,
and is consistent with the development standards in the Municipal
Code. The units are concluded to be appropriate for the proposed
locations, and supplemental design elements appropriately enhance
the architecture of the buildings. The architecture and layout of the
project is compatible with Specific Plan 2003-067 and subsequent
amendments.
5.Site Design
The site design of the project is compatible with surrounding
development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city.
6.Landscape Design
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
project landscaping for the proposed buildings, as conditioned, shall
unify and enhance visual continuity of the proposed residential units
with the surrounding development. Landscape improvements are
designed and sized to provide visual appeal. The permanent overall
site landscaping utilizes various tree and shrub species to enhance
the building architecture.
Tentative Tract Map 2021-0005 (TTM 38188)
1.Tentative Tract Map 38188 is consistent with the La Quinta General
Plan, and subject Specific Plan as proposed. The Tract Map is
consistent with the Low Density Residential land use designation as
set forth in the General Plan, and as set forth in Specific Plan 2003-
067 and subsequent amendments.
2.The design and improvement of Tentative Tract Map 38188 is
consistent with the La Quinta General Plan, and Specific Plan 2003-
067 and subsequent amendments with the implementation of
recommended conditions of approval to ensure consistency for the
homes proposed on the lots created herein. The project density is
consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 2003-
067 and subsequent amendment, and is comparable to surrounding
residential development. The project, as conditioned, is required to
add a minimum of four (4) Accessory Dwelling Units within the
project, making the project reach a total of at least 54 units. With
this requirement, the project goes above the 2 units per acre
4.Architectural Design
192
requirement in the underlying land use. With the minimum of four
(4) additional units, the project meets all requirements in density
within the gross area of the project. The project is consistent with
Government Code section 65863, commonly referred to as the “no
Net Loss” requirement and with the Housing Criss Act of 2019,
Government Code Section 66300.
3.The design of Tentative Tract Map 38188 and proposed
improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage, nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or
their habitat. The Design and Development Director has determined
that this project has been accounted for in and is consistent with
Environmental Assessment 2003-483 and no further environmental
review is required.
4.The design of Tentative Tract Map 38188 and type of improvements
are not likely to cause serious public health problems, insofar as the
project will be required to comply with all laws, standards and
requirements associated with sanitary sewer collection, water
quality and other public health issues.
5.The design and improvements required for Tentative Tract Map
38188 will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at
large, for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision. All roadway improvements, easements, if any and
surrounding improvements will be completed to City standards.
193
¯
SITE Monroe StreetMadison StreetAvenue 60
ATTACHMENT 3
VICNITY MAP 194
ATTACHMENT 4
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
ATTACHMENT 5
245
PEKAREK ARCHITECTS, INC.
architecture planning
________________________________________________________
____________________________________________ __________________________________
31411 camino capistrano, suite 300 949/487-2320
san juan capistrano, ca 92675 fax 949/487-2321
ANDALUSIA COUNTRY CLUB - CLUB VILLAS
SUNRISE COMPANY
COLORS/ MATERIALS LIST
SCHEME #1
“A” ELEVATIONS
1.Concrete “S” Tile: Eagle Roofing Products, Capistrano Blend of 50% 8830
“Albuquerque Blend” & 50% 8402 “Santa Cruz Blend”
2.Metal Standing Seam Roof: Metal Roofing California, Western Lock
“Charcoal Gray”
3. Smooth Stucco/ Metal Chimney Shroud: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW 7757
“High Reflective White”
4. Cement Board Fascia/ Barge/ Wood Eyebrow/ Wood Beam: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 7672 “knitting Needles”
5.Metal Garage Door/ Metal Side Yard Gate/ Fiberglass Entry Door: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 7673 “Pewter Cast”
6.Metal Portico Gate/ Metal Awning: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW 6258
“Tricorn Black”
7.Windows & Sliding Doors: Andersen Windows 100 Series “Black”
8.Decorative Ceramic Tile: Arto, Deco Collection SD-CADIZ-HD
246
247
PEKAREK ARCHITECTS, INC.
architecture planning
________________________________________________________
____________________________________________ __________________________________
31411 camino capistrano, suite 300 949/487-2320
san juan capistrano, ca 92675 fax 949/487-2321
ANDALUSIA COUNTRY CLUB - CLUB VILLAS
SUNRISE COMPANY
COLORS/ MATERIALS LIST
SCHEME #2
“A” ELEVATIONS
1.Concrete “S” Tile: Eagle Roofing Products, Capistrano Blend of 50% 37646
“Desert Clay Blend” & 50% 3814 “San Pablo Blend”
2.Metal Standing Seam Roof: Metal Roofing California, Western Lock
“Dark Bronze”
3. Smooth Stucco/ Metal Chimney Shroud: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW 7566
“Westhighland White”
4. Cement Board Fascia/ Barge/ Wood Eyebrow/ Wood Beam: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 7508 “Tavern Taupe”
5.Metal Garage Door/ Metal Side Yard Gate/ Fiberglass Entry Door: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 7514 “foothills”
6.Metal Portico Gate/ Metal Awning: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW 6258
“Tricorn Black”
7.Windows & Sliding Doors: Andersen Windows 100 Series “Black”
8.Decorative Ceramic Tile: Arto, Deco Collection SD-RABAT-HA
248
249
PEKAREK ARCHITECTS, INC.
architecture planning
________________________________________________________
____________________________________________ __________________________________
31411 camino capistrano, suite 300 949/487-2320
san juan capistrano, ca 92675 fax 949/487-2321
ANDALUSIA COUNTRY CLUB - CLUB VILLAS
SUNRISE COMPANY
COLORS/ MATERIALS LIST
SCHEME #3
“A” ELEVATIONS
1.Concrete “S” Tile: Eagle Roofing Products, Capistrano Blend of 50% 3605
“San Benito Blend” & 50% 3773 “Walnut Creek Blend”
2.Metal Standing Seam Roof: Metal Roofing California, Western Lock
“Dark Bronze”
3. Smooth Stucco/ Metal Chimney Shroud: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW 6098
“Pacer White”
4. Cement Board Fascia/ Barge/ Wood Eyebrow/ Wood Beam: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 6082 “Cobble Brown”
5.Metal Garage Door/ Metal Side Yard Gate/ Fiberglass Entry Door: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 6083 “Sable”
6.Metal Portico Gate/ Metal Awning: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW 6258
“Tricorn Black”
7.Windows & Sliding Doors: Andersen Windows 100 Series “Black”
8.Decorative Ceramic Tile: Arto, Deco Collection SD-FLORA-HA
250
251
PEKAREK ARCHITECTS, INC.
architecture planning
________________________________________________________
____________________________________________ __________________________________
31411 camino capistrano, suite 300 949/487-2320
san juan capistrano, ca 92675 fax 949/487-2321
ANDALUSIA COUNTRY CLUB - CLUB VILLAS
SUNRISE COMPANY
COLORS/ MATERIALS LIST
SCHEME #4
“B” ELEVATIONS
1.Concrete “S” Tile: Eagle Roofing Products, Capistrano Blend of 50% 8806
“Tucson Blend” & 50% 3813 “San Mateo Blend”
2. Smooth Stucco/ Stucco o/Eave/ Metal Chimney Shroud: Sherwin Williams
Paint, SW 7005 “Pure White”
3.Stone Veneer: Creative Mines, Craft Orchard Limestone “Whitegold”
4.Thin Brick: McNear Brick, Old California Series “Melrose”
5. Cement Board Fascia/ Wood Shutters/ Fiberglass Entry Door: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 7509 “Tiki Hut”
6.Metal Garage Door/ Metal Side Yard Gate: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW
7502 “Dry Dock”
7.Metal Portico Gate/ Metal Shutter Hardware: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW
6990 “Caviar”
8.Windows & Sliding Doors: Andersen Windows 100 Series “Black”
252
253
PEKAREK ARCHITECTS, INC.
architecture planning
________________________________________________________
____________________________________________ __________________________________
31411 camino capistrano, suite 300 949/487-2320
san juan capistrano, ca 92675 fax 949/487-2321
ANDALUSIA COUNTRY CLUB - CLUB VILLAS
SUNRISE COMPANY
COLORS/ MATERIALS LIST
SCHEME #5
“B” ELEVATIONS
1.Concrete “S” Tile: Eagle Roofing Products, Capistrano Blend of 50% 8711
“Puesta Del Sol Blend” & 50% 8402 “Santa Cruz Blend”
2. Smooth Stucco/ Stucco o/Eave/ Metal Chimney Shroud: Sherwin Williams
Paint, SW 9180 “Aged White”
3.Stone Veneer: Creative Mines, Craft Orchard Limestone “Alpaca”
4. Thin Brick: McNear Brick, Sandmold Series “Berkshire”
4. Cement Board Fascia/ Wood Shutters/ Fiberglass Entry Door: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 7031 “Mega Greige”
5.Metal Garage Door/ Metal Side Yard Gate: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW
6073 “Perfect Greige”
7. Metal Portico Gate: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW 6990 “Caviar”
8. Windows & Sliding Doors: Andersen Windows 100 Series “Black”
254
255
PEKAREK ARCHITECTS, INC.
architecture planning
________________________________________________________
____________________________________________ __________________________________
31411 camino capistrano, suite 300 949/487-2320
san juan capistrano, ca 92675 fax 949/487-2321
ANDALUSIA COUNTRY CLUB - CLUB VILLAS
SUNRISE COMPANY
COLORS/ MATERIALS LIST
SCHEME #6
“B” ELEVATIONS
1.Concrete “S” Tile: Eagle Roofing Products, Capistrano Blend of 50% 8401
“San Miguell Blend” & 50% 8708 “Del Oro Blend”
2. Smooth Stucco/ Stucco o/Eave/ Metal Chimney Shroud: Sherwin Williams
Paint, SW 7569 “Stucco”
3.Stone Veneer: Creative Mines, Craft Orchard Limestone “Timberwolf”
4. Thin Brick: McNear Brick, Sandmold Series “Limehouse”
4. Cement Board Fascia/ Wood Shutters/ Fiberglass Entry Door: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 9091 “Half Calf”
5.Metal Garage Door/ Metal Side Yard Gate: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW
9090 “Caraibe”
7. Metal Portico Gate: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW 6990 “Caviar”
8. Windows & Sliding Doors: Andersen Windows 100 Series “Black”
256
257
PEKAREK ARCHITECTS, INC.
architecture planning
________________________________________________________
____________________________________________ __________________________________
31411 camino capistrano, suite 300 949/487-2320
san juan capistrano, ca 92675 fax 949/487-2321
ANDALUSIA COUNTRY CLUB - CLUB VILLAS
SUNRISE COMPANY
COLORS/ MATERIALS LIST
SCHEME #7
“C” ELEVATIONS
1.Concrete Flat Tile: Eagle Roofing Products, Bel Air Blend of 50% 47646
“Desert Clay Blend” & 50% 8708 “Del Oro Blend”
2. Smooth Stucco/ Stucco Potshelf/ Stucco Parapet: Sherwin Williams
Paint, SW 7103 “Whitetail”
3. Stone Veneer: Creative Mines, Craft Split Modular “Twine”
4. Cement Board Fascia/ Barge/ Stucco Awning/ Metal Trellis: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 2808 “Rockwood Dark Brown”
5.Metal Garage Door/ Metal Side Yard Gate: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 2806 “Rockwood Brown”
6.Fiberglass Entry Door: Sherwin Williams Pant, SW 2837 “Aurora Brown”
7. Metal Portico Gate: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW 6991 “Black Magic”
8.Windows & Sliding Doors: Andersen Windows 100 Series “Black”
258
259
PEKAREK ARCHITECTS, INC.
architecture planning
________________________________________________________
____________________________________________ __________________________________
31411 camino capistrano, suite 300 949/487-2320
san juan capistrano, ca 92675 fax 949/487-2321
ANDALUSIA COUNTRY CLUB - CLUB VILLAS
SUNRISE COMPANY
COLORS/ MATERIALS LIST
SCHEME #8
“C” ELEVATIONS
1.Concrete Flat Tile: Eagle Roofing Products, Bel Air Blend of 50% 8806
“Tucson Blend” & 50% 4636 “Piedmont Blend”
2. Smooth Stucco/ Stucco Potshelf/ Stucco Parapet: Sherwin Williams
Paint, SW 7101 “Futon”
3. Stone Veneer: Creative Mines, Craft Split Modular “Timberwolf”
4. Cement Board Fascia/ Barge/ Stucco Awning/ Metal Trellis: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 6076 “Turkish Coffee”
5.Metal Garage Door/ Metal Side Yard Gate: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 7525 “Tree Branch”
6.Fiberglass Entry Door: Sherwin Williams Pant, SW 3803 “Rockwood Terra
Cotta”
7. Metal Portico Gate: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW 6991 “Black Magic”
8.Windows & Sliding Doors: Andersen Windows 100 Series “Black”
260
261
PEKAREK ARCHITECTS, INC.
architecture planning
________________________________________________________
____________________________________________ __________________________________
31411 camino capistrano, suite 300 949/487-2320
san juan capistrano, ca 92675 fax 949/487-2321
ANDALUSIA COUNTRY CLUB - CLUB VILLAS
SUNRISE COMPANY
COLORS/ MATERIALS LIST
SCHEME #9
“C” ELEVATIONS
1.Concrete Flat Tile: Eagle Roofing Products, Bel Air Blend of 50% 47646
“Desert Clay Blend” & 50% 4814 “San Pablo Blend”
2. Smooth Stucco/ Stucco Potshelf/ Stucco Parapet: Sherwin Williams
Paint, SW 7555 “Patience”
3. Stone Veneer: Creative Mines, Craft Split Modular “Powder”
4. Cement Board Fascia/ Barge/ Stucco Awning/ Metal Trellis: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 9183 “Dark Clove”
5.Metal Garage Door/ Metal Side Yard Gate: Sherwin
Williams Paint, SW 7515 “Homestead Brown”
6.Fiberglass Entry Door: Sherwin Williams Pant, SW 2831 “Classical Gold”
7. Metal Portico Gate: Sherwin Williams Paint, SW 6991 “Black Magic”
8.Windows & Sliding Doors: Andersen Windows 100 Series “Black”
262
ATTACHMENT 6263
264
265
266
POWERPOINTS
PLANNING
COMMISSION
APRIL 12, 2022
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
1
Planning Commission Meeting
April 12, 2022
Pledge of Allegiance
1
2
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
2
Public Comment - Teleconference
Join virtually via Zoom:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/82853067939
Meeting ID: 828 5306 7939
“Raise Hand” to speak
Or join via phone: (253) 215 - 8782
*9 = Raise Hand to speak when addressed
*6 = Unmute when prompted
Please limit your comments to 3 minutes.
How to “Raise Hand” via Computer
3
4
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
3
How to “Raise Hand” via Smart Phone App
Public Comment
Via Teleconference
In Progress
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/82853067939
Meeting ID: 828 5306 7939
Telephone: (253) 215-8782
“Raise Hand” to request to speak
Limit Comments to 3 minutes
*9 = Raise Hand; *6 = Unmute
5
6
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
4
Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
PH1 –Coral Mountain Resort Project
Continued Hearing
Background
•The Planning Commission continued this item
on March 22, 2022, to allow time for staff to
report on the following:
–Updates to the project’s construction timeline.
–Additional information regarding the reuse of the
Wave Basin.
–Additional information on the light emanating from
the top of the light poles.
7
8
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
5
Background
–The applicant’s potential quantification of a
reduced number of short‐term vacation rentals
within the project.
–An analysis of the cost/revenue implications of
reducing short‐term vacation rentals as it relates
to the City’s costs.
Construction Schedule
Table 1
Development Agreement Performance Schedule Summary
Project Component Years
Wave Basin and some resort residential and hotel
development (quantities undefined)
3-5
Completion of hotel and balance of resort residential
(quantities undefined)
5-10
8,000± SF of Neighborhood Commercial 3-6
220 single family units in Planning Area 2 8-15
11,000± SF Neighborhood Commercial 9-12
250 single family units in Planning Area 2 (balance
of single family units)
15-22
41,000± SF Neighborhood Commercial 20-23
9
10
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
6
Wave Basin Reuse
•Added language in Development Agreement:
–The applicant would be required, contractually, to
dismantle and remove the wave making
machinery and would either
(i) continue to operate the basin itself as a
recreational lake amenity, or
(ii) seek City approval for an alternative use.
Lighting
11
12
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
7
Lighting
Lighting
13
14
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
8
Lighting
Vacation Rentals
Table 2
Summary of Revenues and Costs
Revenues:Phase I Phase II Phase III Build Out
Total Annual Revenues
at Phase Buildout $1,754,758 $1,895,137 $2,130,995 $2,078,195
Costs:
Total Annual Costs at
Phase Build Out $594,437 $594,434 $1,592,234 $1,592,234
Annual Cash Flow at
Phase Build Out $1,160,321 $1,300,703 $538,761 $485,961
Annual Cash Flow with
No Transient
Occupancy Tax
Revenue -$273,034 -$132,652 -$894,594 -$947,394
15
16
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
9
DRD Park and Trail
Recommendation
Continue the item to the meeting of April 26, 2022, when the full
Planning Commission will be available to hear the item.
However, should the Commission wish to proceed, the
recommendation is as follows:
•Adopt a resolution recommending that the Council certify the Coral
Mountain Resort EIR (SCH #2021020310) and direct staff to
prepare CEQA Findings and a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for Council consideration.
•Adopt a resolution recommending that the Council approve
SP2019-0003, GPA2019-0002, ZC2019-0004, SP2020-0002,
TTM2019-0005, DA2021-0002 and SDP2021-0001 subject to the
Findings and Conditions of Approval.
17
18
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
10
Background
•Andalusia Specific Plan approved by
County, annexed by City 20 years ago.
•Project includes 929 acres
•Project includes seven applications to
result in a master planned resort
community on 386 acres.
19
20
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
11
Background
Project Components
•Specific Plan Amendment
–Remove 386 acres from the Andalusia Specific Plan.
•General Plan Amendment & Zone Change
–386 acres west of Madison
–Change from General Commercial/Neighborhood Commercial, Low
Density Residential and Open Space – Golf to General
Commercial/Neighborhood Commercial, Low Density Residential,
Tourist Commercial and Open Space – Parks and Recreation
21
22
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
12
Project Components
•Specific Plan, including development standards and
guidelines to allow:
–Up to 600 residential units
–Up to 150 hotel rooms
–Up to 60,000 SF of Neighborhood Commercial uses
–Up to 57,000 SF of resort commercial uses
–A 16,6 acre artificial surf basin
–26.5 acre “back of house” area south of wave basin and hotel
for temporary structures and parking
–24 acres of open space
Project Components
•Tentative Tract Map
–Subdivide 386 acres, including parcels for surf basin, hotel, resort
residential, single family homes
•Development Agreement
–Provide assurances to developer, and fee structure for City to recoup
costs.
•Site Development Permit
–30.1 acres, including the surf basin and surrounding land,
maintenance buildings and wave-making equipment
23
24
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
13
Specific Plan Amendment
•Remove 386 acres from
the 929 acre Andalusia
Specific Plan.
•No change to the
development potential of
Andalusia.
•West side of Madison
Street, if removed from the
Specific Plan, subject to
seven applications
including new Specific Plan.
General Plan Amendment and
Zone Change
Table 1
Existing and Proposed Land Uses
General Plan/Zoning Exist.
Acres
Proposed
Acres
General Commercial/
Neighborhood
Commercial
8.4 7.7
Low Density
Residential/
Low Density
Residential
204.2 232.3
Open Space
Recreation/
Golf Course
171.9 0
Open Space
Recreation/
Parks & Recreation
0 23.6
Tourist Commercial/
Tourist Commercial
0 120.8
25
26
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
14
Specific Plan
•Establishes Development Standards and
Guidelines for 386 acres.
•Divides the site into 4 planning areas:
•PA-I: Neighborhood Commercial
•PA-II: 496 low density units: single
family, clustered units, condos or
townhomes.
•PA-III: Tourist commercial,
including hotel, resort residential,
wave basin, resort commercial and
back of house
•PA-IV: Open space including passive
and active recreation, trail
Specific Plan
•Development to be phased.
•Current SDP for wave basin.
•SDPs for resort residential in
PA-III and part of PA-I
submitted and under review
•Future SDPs for hotel,
residential units
•Provides for on-site and perimeter
roadway improvements.
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
15
Specific Plan
•Contemporary design
aesthetic
•Establishes allowance
for 4 special events per
year, with up to 2,500
attendees (in addition
to residents and hotel
guests) with Temporary
Use Permit requirement.
Specific Plan
•Hierarchy of landscaping styles,
from native to more manicured
desert style.
29
30
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
16
Tentative Tract Map
•Subdivides entire 386 acres
–Neighborhood commercial
–26 single family lots
–104 resort residential lots
–Lots for hotel, wave basin
–Backbone streets
•Future subdivision for resort
commercial, single family
residential, back of house
area
Development Agreement
A contract between the applicant and the City that:
•Guarantees the implementation of mitigation
measures and conditions of approval.
•Allows STVRs for all residential units.
•Establishes mitigation fees to cover costs of
providing services to the project, tied to transient
occupancy tax revenue.
31
32
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
17
Site Development Permit
•Addresses the site design, architecture and
landscaping for the surf basin area.
Site Development Permit
33
34
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
18
Site Development Permit
Site Development Permit
35
36
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
19
Site Development Permit
Site Development Permit
37
38
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
20
Site Development Permit
Environmental Impact Report
•Draft EIR was available for public comments for 45
days.
•Received just under 100 comment letters.
•Completed Response to Comments/Final EIR.
–Comments addressed multiple issue areas, and were all
addressed.
–Concerns by CDFW resulted in addition of a Bighorn Sheep fence,
landscaping restrictions added to Specific Plan.
–No change in the overall severity of impacts identified.
39
40
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
21
Environmental Issues
Aesthetics, Light and Glare
•Project will block views of Coral Mountain
•Project proposes 80 foot light poles around the wave
pool. The lighting analysis shows that the light levels will
be contained on the site.
Environmental Issues
Cultural Resources & Tribal Resources
•Multiple archaeological and historic sites identified on
and immediately adjacent to the property.
•Extensive mitigation program required prior to any
ground disturbing activity to protect resources in situ,
conduct extensive testing, and prepare National Register
of Historic Places applications.
41
42
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
22
Environmental Issues
Noise
•Project noise impacts are less than significant with
mitigation incorporated.
•Operational noise levels meet General Plan standards for
surrounding communities, due to distance.
•Mitigation measures: construction, wave pool hours 7
AM to 10 PM, wall on north and east boundary.
Environmental Issues
•Project will be required to install
traffic signals at Madison & Avenue 58
and Madison and Main Entry at build
out.
•Additional improvements required at 9
other intersections, fair share/DIF.
•For special events, all improvements
must be in place or traffic analysis
provided with TUP, traffic
management required.
Traffic
•Analysis conducted for phased build out.
•Project generates 6,994 trips at buildout, 8,932 trips during special events.
Improvement Location Timing
Traffic signal Madison and Avenue 54 Phase 1
Traffic signal Jefferson and Avenue 54 Phase 1
Roundabout
striping/2
lanes
Jefferson and Avenue 52 Phase 1
Add 1 west-
bound through
lane
Jefferson and Avenue 50 Buildout
Traffic signal Monroe and Avenue 60 Buildout
Traffic signal Monroe and Avenue 58 Phase 2
Traffic signal Monroe and Airport Buildout
Traffic signal Monroe and Avenue 54 Phase 1
Traffic signal Monroe and Avenue 52 Phase 1
43
44
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
23
Environmental Issues
Water Resources
•A Water Supply Assessment was prepared and approved
by CVWD.
•Water demand of the project will be 958.63 acre-feet
per year.
•CVWD has sufficient water supplies to serve the project
during normal, single dry and multiple dry years from
multiple water sources, including groundwater and
supplemental allocations.
Environmental Issues
All impacts can be mitigated to less than significant levels
except:
•Aesthetics - Impacts to views of Coral Mountain
•Greenhouse Gas Emissions
•These impacts remain significant and unavoidable.
Under CEQA, the City Council must determine whether
the benefits of the project outweigh its significant
impacts.
45
46
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
24
Recommendation
•Adopt a resolution recommending that the City
Council certify the Coral Mountain Resort EIR (SCH
#2021020310) and direct staff to prepare CEQA
Findings and a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for City Council consideration.
•Adopt a resolution recommending that the City
Council approve SP2019-0003, GPA2019-0002,
ZC2019-0004, SP2020-0002, TTM2019-0005,
DA2021-0002 and SDP2021-0001 subject to the
Findings and Conditions of Approval.
Visual Simulations
From Avenue 58 at Lion’s Gate
47
48
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
25
Visual Simulations
From Madison Street at Andalusia
Planning Commission Meeting
April 12, 2022
PH2 – SDP 2021-0008 AND
TTM 2021-0005 FOR ANDALUSIA HOMES
49
50
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
26
Background
•Andalusia residential development
originally approved by City in 2003
•Multiple phases of the project have
been entitled and constructed
Vicinity Map
51
52
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
27
Project
•Applicant requesting TTM and SDP
approval to subdivide 26.12 acres
–50 residential lots;
–6 street/open space lots; and
–Architecture and landscape plans for 54
units
Site Development Permit
(SDP)
•Requesting SDP approval for
architecture, site and landscaping
design for the homes
•Seven (7) different plan types, each
with three (3) elevations
•Total square footage on plans range
from 3,476 sf to 7,050 sf
53
54
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
28
Elevations
Elevations
55
56
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
29
Floor Plan
Color/Materials
57
58
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
30
Landscaping
Tentative Tract Map (TTM)
•TTM approval to subdivide 26.12
acres into 50 residential lots and 6
street/open space lots
•To ensure compliance with density, at
least 4 lots will require ADUs, per
COAs
59
60
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
31
Tentative Tract Map
CEQA
•Staff determined this project is
consistent with EA 2003-483 for
Andalusia project
61
62
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
32
Findings
•Findings relate to design of architecture,
site, and landscaping, CEQA compliance,
and project consistency with zoning code
and General Plan
•Four additional units conditioned on the
project ensure consistency with “No Net
Loss” requirement and Housing Crisis Act of
2019
Recommendation
•Adopt a resolution to approve Tentative
SDP2021-0008 AND TTM2021-0006 (TTM
38188) subject to the findings and
conditions of approval and find the project
consistent with Environmental Assessment
2003-483
63
64
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 12, 2022
33
65
PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
APPLICANT PRESENTATION AND
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT
CORAL MOUNTAIN
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
4-12-2022
Introductions and Recap
Introductions
Topics of Interest from March 22, 2022 PC hearing:
•Wave Basin Lighting
•Development Agreement
¾Schedule of Performance
¾STVRs
2
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
CORAL MOUNTAIN
Wave Basin Lighting
November 17, 2021 4
Light Test Photography
Lights On Lights Off
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
5
VIEW FROM LION’S GATE
Source: Coral Mountain Draft EIR Exhibit 4.1-7
6
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
7
8
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
9
10
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
11
12
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
13
Source:
14
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
15
16
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
November 17, 2021
Light Test Photography
17
Lighting at
The Quarry
Ambient Light Sources 18
Coral Mountain Light Test
Ave. 58/Madison Looking South towards 60th
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Ambient Light Sources 19
Coral Mountain Light Test
Madison & 58th
Ambient Light Sources 20
Coral Mountain Light Test
Madison & 60th
Madison & Andalusia Entry
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Ambient Light Sources 21
Coral Mountain Light Test
PGA West
22
Reduction in Light Pole Height - Impact
Source: KSWC Engineering Dept.
•Reduction in light pole height
from 80 - 60’ results in 17
additional light poles (34 total)
to provide equivalent light
footprint on water surface.
•Re-orientation angle of light
hood results in overspill of
light 107’ outside of the Basin
water surface area.
107’
Towards
Coral Mountain
Analysis
Current Design
-Light Cut-off
Revised Design
-Light Cut-off
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
23
Coral Mountain Light and Glare: KEY FACTS & CONCLUSIONS
•Only very limited glimpses of the Wave Basin lighting will be visible from outside the property,
in limited locations.
•The new perimeter landscape installation, including trees, and new homes will completely
obscure views of the lighting.
•In the context of the existing light sources surrounding the project site,these very limited
potential views of the Wave Basin lighting would not be a significant impact (reference Slides
17 - 21, ambient light sources in the vicinity).
•It is important to maintain the 80’ pole height to optimize the Wave Basin lighting with the
minimum number of poles and to avoid any light overspill outside the Basin.
•The current design is the least obtrusive overhead lighting system in terms of light cutoffs and
glare, and the fixtures are fully rated “Dark Skies Compliant.”
CORAL MOUNTAIN
Short-Term Vacation Rentals
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
25
Source: City of La Quinta – STVR Presentation to City Council by City Staff, 3/1/2022
Attachment 1 to City Council Staff Report
26
Source: City of La Quinta – STVR Presentation to City Council by City Staff, 3/1/2022
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
27
Coral Mountain Resort: STVR Complaint Ratios by Area
AREA
STVR PERMITS
AS OF
12/20/2021
TOTAL
NUMBER
OF PARCELS
TOTAL
NUMBER OF
COMPLAINTS
IN 2021
COMPLAINTS
PER PERMIT
PARTICIPATION
RATE
So. La Quinta
/PGA West 354 3,040 281 0.79 11.6
The Cove
252 4,711 288 1.14 5.30
STVR Exempt
Areas 321 911 52 0.16 35.20
Source: Data compiled from City of La Quinta – STVR Presentation to City Council by City Staff, 3/1/2022
28
Decline in Total STVRs in La Quinta
Source: City of La Quinta – STVR Presentation to City Council by City Staff, 3/1/2022
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
29
Revenue to the City from STVRs
Source: City of La Quinta – STVR Presentation to City Council by City Staff, 3/1/2022
30
Revenue to the City from STVRs
Source: City of La Quinta – STVR Presentation to City Council by City Staff, 3/1/2022
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
31
Key STVR Benefits
x STVRs provide greater certainty to the developer and the City of
the hotel underwriting being successful.
x STVRs diversify the revenue stream sources to the City’s General
Fund and help ensure that if one tax component (for example
retail sales taxes) is impacted by unforeseen circumstances, the
severity will be contained, i.e. “Don’t Put All Your Eggs in One
Basket.”
x STVRs at Coral Mountain are projected to generate more than $2
million in TOT revenues to the City annually.
x A well-designed STVR program at Coral Mountain helps hedge
against uncertainty in other parts of the City where attrition due to
declining permits may have significant impacts on the reliability of
a crucial General Fund revenue stream.
32
Coral Mountain STVRs: KEY FACTS & CONCLUSIONS
x STVR Exempt Zones offer valuable insight and guidance with respect to future
STVR programs:
¾STVRs in the Exempt Areas have dramatically fewer complaints than in the
PGA West and Cove neighborhoods.
¾STVR participation rates are much higher than other neighborhoods, which
means these units provide far more TOT revenue to the City per parcel.
x La Quinta’s existing data on STVRs confirms that they can successfully
operate in planned areas with exceptionally low complaint rates.
x There is no reason to limit the number of STVRs at Coral Mountain
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Presentation Concludes
•Respectfully request that the Planning Commission recommend
Certification of the FEIR and approval of all associated applications to
the City Council
•Reserve the right for rebuttal if new issues or arguments are raised
during tonight’s public comment.
THANK YOU!
33
Questions?
To learn more and stay up to date on all aspects
of Coral Mountain resort, please visit
coralmountainlaquinta.com
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
CORAL MOUNTAIN
TOPICS OF INTEREST
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
4-12-2022
CORAL MOUNTAIN
Sustainability: Water
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Commercial
6%Open Space
32%
Residential
45%
Resort
4%
Wave
13%
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
3
TOTAL PROJECT WATER USE
1CVWD-approved Water Supply Assessment and Water Supply Verification, April 14, 2020
Commercial
4%
Open Space
37%
Residential
43%Resort
1%
Wave
15%
OUTDOOR PROJECT WATER USE
Regarding Water Use:
x The Wave Basin is a minority proportion of the total and outdoor project water use
1:
* From Water Supply Assessment and Water Supply Verification approved by CVWD April 14, 2020
4
Indoor v. Outdoor
Water Use*
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
1CVWD-approved Water Supply Assessment and Water Supply Verification, April 14, 2020
x The “Big Story”. The big story here is not the water use of the Wave Basin. It is the
opportunity to improve the “Water Use Profile” of the project by scrutinizing the two
largest water outdoor water users: Residential and Open Space uses.
x Outdoor Residential Use. This demand is typically swimming pools and private landscape irrigation.
Private swimming pools must be filled with domestic (potable drinking) water as homes typically have
no onsite treatment option to use non-potable water. However, landscape can use available non-potable
water sources, when available and appropriate design provisions are made.
x Open Space Use. This demand is typically community common area – street medians, parkways, parks,
etc. In many cases (particularly in older communities) these areas are irrigated with domestic (drinking)
water from municipal water (i.e. CVWD) irrigation meters. Meeting current CVWD and City landscape
ordinances and adhering to the “MAWA” already represents a quantum leap over the requirements of
the master plans of 20 years ago. With proper design, water use efficiency can be enhanced with non-
potable water distribution and management systems.
5
The Big Story
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
Improving the Water Use Profile - HOW
x Use Non-Potable Water Sources. To the greatest extent possible, use water that is non-
potable (water not suitable for drinking without treatment) for outdoor uses.
x Expand Non-Potable Water Use. Besides common area irrigation, look at non-traditional
uses of non-potable water within the HOA community management system, like
residential front yards within production housing areas. Streetscapes,medians, parkways,
and parks would already be considered “traditional” and irrigated by non-potable sources.
x Canal Water Availability. Work with the CVWD to secure a turnout from the All-American
Canal system currently traversing the property under existing water rights (underway).
x Indoor Fixture Efficiencies.Look for continued advances in water efficiency in indoor
plumbing fixtures.
x Recycled Water. Discuss piping for Recycled Water with CVWD, notwithstanding the
current view that it will not be delivered to this part of the Valley.
6
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
x “The Wave Basin is an irresponsible use of water.”
No. Water use is correlated to Public Benefit. It creates robust dollar-for-dollar City
General Fund revenue on a land footprint a fraction of alternative recreational amenities.
7
$3,474,320
$1,593,716 $1,880,605
$0
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
$3,500,000
$4,000,000
Annual Revenues Annual Costs Annual Cash Flows
Comment:
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
x “Comparing the Wave Basin to a golf course in terms of water use is a misrepresentation
because the Wave Basin must use potable drinking water.”
Source: CVWD Non-potable and Recycled Water Fact Sheet, updated January 2021 and Irrigation Water Sources for Golf Course, Update: September 2020
8
CV Golf Course Irrigation Source Water by Type
(106 Golf Courses)
Recycled All-American/Coachella Canal Pumped Groundwater
Comment:
50%50%
16%
(17.5)
34%
(36)
50%
(54)
False. The WB uses the same, pre-
dominant water sources used by the
106+ golf courses in the Coachella
Valley---but a fraction (10-15%) of it.
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
•“TheWaveBasinistaking our drinking water.”
False. The wave basin water filtration system is capable of using non-potable water
sources. In fact, at the Surf Ranch in Lemoore, this is exactly the case. The resulting water
chemistry in the Wave Basin is virtually identical to private backyard swimming pools filled
with domestic water from the municipal water supply (“drinking water”) and meets
regulatory safety requirements for recreational contact.
9
Source: Kelly Slater Wave Company
Comment:
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
x “InadroughttheWaveBasinwillneedtobeturnedoffbecauseithastousepotable
drinkingwater.Golfcourseswillbeokbecausetheyhavealternatives.”
Incorrect.PerSlideϵ,non-potablewaterisasuitablesourcefortheWaveBasinafter
treatment.
Also,undertheCVWDWaterShortageContingencyPlan,theWa veBasinandgolfcourses
arelikelytobesimilarlytreatedforpurposesofwatercutbacks.Theprimarydifferenceis
inawatershortagethatrequireswatertobedrasticallyreducedorcutoff,theWaveBasin
willnotsufferextremeplantmortality.Itwillmerelyevaporate.
Source: CVWD Non-potable and Recycled Water Fact Sheet, updated January 2021 and Irrigation Water Sources for Golf Course, Update: September 2020
10
Comment:
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
• “CVWD’s groundwater management plan assumes an increase in water being
delivered from the Colorado River.”
CMWD Response:
•The increase being referred to is very small and related to an existing agreement
– see next slide.
•In summary – through the complicated set of transfer agreements between
CVWD, MWD and DWA, there is a temporary short-term reduction in CVWD’s
allotment of water from the river – this amount is reduced by 5,000 AFY between
2020 and 2026. After 2026, this temporary reduction ends.
11
Comment:
Source: CVWD Groundwater Management Plan
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
CMWD Response [continued]
•CVWD’s total allocations under the QSA, including MWD’s transfer of 35,000 AFY and
the MWD/IID Transfer, will increase from 424,000 AFY in 2020 to 459,000 AFY by 2026
and remain at that level for the remainder of the 75-year term of the QSA.
•Basically, the overall “increase” that results from this is 30,000 AFY in allocations under
the QSA. But this increase is part of the overall water supply projections; the key
sentence in CVWD’s Alternative Plan is this:
“However, this Alternative Plan Update does not assume full QSA ramp up
volumes will be available due to ongoing drought and forecasted climate change
on the Colorado River system.”
•The Groundwater Mgmt. Plan takes into account both the “ongoing drought” and
“forecasted climate change” on the Colorado River system.
12
Source: CVWD Groundwater Management Plan
Comment:
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
13
Source: CVWD Groundwater Management Plan
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
14
1CVWD –Water Shortage Contingency Plan, J une 2 021
Misstatements of Fact we hear repeated:
1CCCCCCCCCCCCVVVVVVWWWWWWWWDDDD ––WWWWWWWWWaaaaaaaaaaattttttteeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrr SSSSSSSSSSSShhhhhhhhooooooorrrrrrrrrrrtttttttaaaaaaaaaaaggggggggggggggggggggggggggggeeeeeeeeeeeeee CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCoooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnnnntttttttttttttttttttttttttiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnggggggggggggggggggeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnncccccccccyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy PPPPPPPPlllllllaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnnnn,,,,,,JJJJJJJJJJJJuuuuuuuuuuuuunnnnnnnnnnnnnnneeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 2222222222222222200000000000000000000000002222222222222222222222222211111111111111111111
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMiiiiiiiiiiiiiiissssssssssssssssssssssssssstttttttttttttttttttttttttaaaaaaaaaaaatttttttteeeeeeeeeeeeemmmmmeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnnnttttttttttttss oofffff FFFaacctt wwweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee hhhhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaar reepppppeeeaaaattteeeddd:::
•“The project should not be approved. We are going to run out of water.”
CMWD Response: Inaccurate per CVWD’s updated Groundwater Management Plan:
Comment:
Coral Mountain’s water use was included in the GMP. Because CVWD concludes the
groundwater basin is sustainable, by extension Coral Mountain’s water use is sustainable.
“
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
•“The groundwater basin is in overdraft and is going to be empty in a few years.”
15
Comment:
False. Per CVWD and its recent
Groundwater Management Plan
update, the East Whitewater River
Subbasin AOB has risen an average
of 45’ over the past ten years and
the basin is stable (no overdraft).
Further, hydrographs from
monitoring wells in the vicinity of
the Coral Mountain site indicate
groundwater levels have risen
approximately 95’ over the same
period.
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
16
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
17
• Depicts Net Positive
GWB inflow for past
year
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
18
• “Shows the Indio
Subbasin is sustainable”
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
19
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
20
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
21
• Depicts net positive
Basin-wide storage
condition
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
22
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
23
CM
• Increases in GW levels in
vicinity of Coral Mtn Specific
Plan Area
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
24
• Key Wells for Groundwater
Level Monitoring
• Key Well 036 is located
adjacent to Coral Mountain
Site
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
25
• Indicates +85’ rise in
groundwater level at Key
Well 036 since 2010
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
26
• How Groundwater Extractions in the Indio Subbasin
are Used
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
27
• “Groundwater Extractions”
includes municipal production
for domestic purposes (indoor
and outdoor) as well as
outdoor recreational and
landscape user (e.g. golf
course and community
common areas).
• Domestic water use
calculated as follows:
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
Back Up Slides
28
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
29
Source: CVWD-approved Water Supply Assessment and Water Supply Verification, April 14, 2020
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
30
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
50%
Source: CVWD Non-potable and Recycled Water Fact Sheet, updated January 2021
50% 50%
50%50%34%
16%
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
31
50%
Source: CVWD
50% 50%
50%50%34%
16%
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
32
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
50% 50%
50%50%34%
16%
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
x The CM Wave basin is not considered a “Wave Pool” under State law.
x A Wave Pool is “…a swimming pool designed for the purpose of producing
breaking wave action in the water and that is not primarily designed for standup
surfing or bodyboarding [emphasis added].”
1
x Wave basin means “…an artificially constructed body of water within an
impervious water containment structure incorporating the use of a mechanical
device principally designed to generate waves for surfing on a surfboard or
analogous surfing device commonly used in the ocean and intended for sport.
‘Wave basin’ does not include wave pools.”
2
Regarding State Laws Governing Wave Basins
1 Wave Pool Safety Act Article 2.7 (commencing with Section 115950 of Chapter 5 of Part 10 of Division 104 of the CA Health and Safety Code.
2 Draft AB 2298 - Mayes, February 16, 2022
33
WATER SUSTAINABILITY
34
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
CORAL MOUNTAIN
Sustainability: Energy
2
Coral Mountain’s Energy Sustainability Measures will reduce CARBON (CO2emissions) by almost 4,000 Metric Tons annually, the equivalent of taking more than
850 cars off the road, by exceeding Cal-Green (T-24) requirements.
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
3
Coral Mountain Resort: Projected Energy Demand*
*Baseline Estimated Energy Demand before the application of design and technology measures.
Source: BG Building Works and TAE Technologies Estimated Load Table prepared for IID CSP Application that is the basis of Will-Serve Commitment
4
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
5
6
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
7
CORAL MOUNTAIN
Local Trail Connections
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
50%
EXTERNAL TRAIL CONNECTIONS – Desert Recreation District
2
Source: Desert Recreation District
50% 50%
50%50%34%
16%Coral Mtn Site
CM
50%
EXTERNAL TRAIL CONNECTIONS – Desert Recreation District
3
Source: CMWD, LLC
50% 50%
50%50%34%
16%
Connection
Points
Notes
1. Concept Planning for Coral
Mountain Park provided by
Desert Recreation District.
2. Coral Mountain Wave trail
alignment is conceptual and
subject to additional
consultation with City of La
Quinta, Desert Recreation
District, CAFW, and ACBCI
3. CM Trail highlighted in
Yellow.
CM Park
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
50%
4
50% 50%
50%50%34%
16%
EXTERNAL TRAIL CONNECTIONS – Desert Recreation District
Source: Google Earth with CM Master Plan and Coral Mtn Park Master Plan Overlays
CM Trail Connection
Highlighted in Yellow
50%
5
50% 50%
50%50%34%
16%
EXTERNAL TRAIL CONNECTIONS – Desert Recreation District
Source: Google Earth with CM Master Plan and Coral Mtn Park Master Plan Overlays
CM Trail Connection
Highlighted in Yellow
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
50%
6
50% 50%
50%50%34%
16%
EXTERNAL TRAIL CONNECTIONS – Desert Recreation District
Source: Google Earth with CM Master Plan and Coral Mtn Park Master Plan Overlays
CM
Trail
Connection
50%
7
50% 50%
50%50%34%
16%
EXTERNAL TRAIL CONNECTIONS – Aerial View to South
Source: Google Earth with CM Master Plan and Coral Mtn Park Master Plan Overlays
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
50%
8
50% 50%
50%50%34%
16%
EXTERNAL TRAIL CONNECTIONS – Aerial View to South
Source: Google Earth with CM Master Plan and Coral Mtn Park Master Plan Overlays
50%
EXTERNAL TRAIL CONNECTIONS – Consider the Possibilities…
9
50% 50%
50%50%34%
16%
55555555505555005000500555555555505555550505050505055555005050555555555555555055555505550055505505555555055505555000000505550000005050555550000050505550000550555500505555550000055555500555555000005000055000%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
5050505050050505050505050500550505050000550505%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5050505055555050505050500505000505550500500050555005005555000050550055500505555000050000500555000505000005550550005050005505005500500550000000050550050050000050000%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%00500000000555505000500000055500000005550005550005555555000555505555500000055550000555500000550000000000000000%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%50000555005000005500000050005550005555555550005555055500055000000000000%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%50505000505005000050000055555555555555%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555050505050005050005005555500%%%%%%55500000000005555%%%%%%5500000000055550000055550000000005%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5500000055500005550000000%%%%%%%00000000000000%%%%%%%%%%%%000000%%%%%%3333334343333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333%
1616161616666666666166%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
oB
o H
T r
o f f a i l
LQ
Cove
CM
Wave Andalusia
Trilogy
P
Source: Desert Rec District Trail Maps
Bear Creek
Trailhead
The
Quarry
Lake
Cahuilla
Co. Park
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
3ODQWVSHFLPHQVLQ\HOORZFRUUHODWHWRPDWHULDORQ06+&37DEOH&KHFNHGLWHPVWREHUHPRYHGIURPSDOHWWH.HHSLWHPV WUHHVSHFLHV ZLOOQRWEHSODQWHGLQEXIIHUDUHDPLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - APPLICANT PRESENTATION
HANDOUTS
PLANNING
COMMISSION
APRIL 12, 2022
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSTION MEETING - APRIL 12, 2022 - WRITTEN COMMENT/PRESENTATION BY LQRRD
PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT
WRITTEN PUBLIC
COMMENT
PLANNING
COMMISSION
APRIL 12, 2022
1
Tania Flores
From:Nancy Bruce
Sent:Friday, April 8, 2022 5:01 PM
To:Tania Flores
Subject:Comments for the Planning Commission meeting on 4/12/22
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper
judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for
information. **
My name is Nancy Bruce and I live at , La Quinta, CA 92253, my phone is 206-
and I want to talk about Agenda Item C, Lighting.
I am concerned about the lighting plans for the proposed Coral Mountain Resort. The 80 foot
light poles are being planned so surfing can be done at night. Night light is bad for birds, bats,
animals and humans. I see no reason why the surf pool needs to be operational after dark
hence no need for lights. The developer goes on and on about the lights not spilling over the
edge of the property but people who live around this area don’t look down at night, they look
up! They want to see the mountains silhouette in the first evenings light. When darkness finally
falls they want to look up and see the stars and planets. The light emanating from the wave
pool will be a huge bolus of light that will be seem from miles around and will block that
stunning view of the beautiful mountains and stars at night. For all the talk of wanting to be a
good neighbor I haven’t seen a single concession from the developer to anything that the people
who live in this area have brought up. And I just saw on the marketing brochure that is
attached to the Planning Commission Agenda (?) that there will be a skate park. No mention
has been made of lighting of this area. I see the new La Quinta skate park is lit up like a ball
field at night, are we to expect the same?
Please, please do what you can to help this part of La Quinta stay the quiet, lovely area that it
is!
Thank you, Nancy Bruce
1
Tania Flores
From:Ron Phillips
Sent:Friday, April 8, 2022 4:23 PM
To:Tania Flores
Subject:Planning Commission 4/12 Comment on Continuation of March 22 meeting
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
I wish to express my opposition to the proposed Coral Mountain Resort and the proposed changes to the 2035 La Quinta
General Plan.
I did attend the meeting on March 22, 2022 in person and stayed until the meeting was postponed so I had the benefit
of hearing all the comments made. I am not an expert on issues such as water, noise, lighting or traffic impacts. My
concerns are regarding the marketing plan for Coral Mountain Resort, Short‐Term Vacation Rentals and the traffic
impact on my specific community. I have been a homeowner in Puerta Azul for 17 years. Our community pays the
mitigation fee and is required to allow short‐term vacation rentals. My concerns are as follows:
Coral Mountain Resort Marketing Plan
There was little, if any, information regarding how the developer intends to successfully market their proposed
project. As a former senior executive of the San Diego Regional Economic Corporation, I have worked on projects from
bringing Legoland to Carlsbad, assisting Sea World with expansion plans and helping residential home builders get
permits from San Diego County communities. I have been a board member of the San Diego Convention and Visitors
Bureau, an Executive Director of a museum in Balboa Park and served on the Host Committee for both the Republican
National Convention and the Super Bowl. In addition, I have been a Bank President involved with all types of lending.
So, how does Coral Mountain Resort intend to attract the home buyers, hotel guests and commercial space
tenants? Living near 58th Street, which I walk regularly, I would observe that all of the existing residential
neighborhoods have enjoyed virtually no new home construction in the last ten years. It has been only in the last few
months that a number of homes are now being constructed. You are well aware of the reasons why this has been. If
the proposed target market of home buyers is active and younger, how likely is it that these folks would be able to
afford a second home or be willing to make it a full time residence? Interest rates are already rising. Inflation is also
increasing. Building materials are becoming harder to obtain in a timely manner. Where are the construction workers
and hotel workers coming from? I just drove by Talus and observed that no construction is going on. Who will be
providing the construction loans? While the area tourism organization appears to support this proposed project, what
have they actually done to show you any study that they feel can help get "heads in beds"? What commitments, if any,
have commercial tenants made to this project? Do you risk having just a surf basin, a hotel and a few casitas while the
housing market struggles to materialize?
Short‐Term Vacation Rentals (STVR)
Of the current 1165 STVRs in La Quinta, over 30 are in Puerta Azul located on South Madison north of 58th. This is over
25% of the homes in my community. Without intending criticism of any La Quinta employee or department, I would
observe that the STVR program is poorly administered. I contend many who are renting their homes on a short‐term
basis are not even properly permitted with the City. Many with permits are not fully reporting their activity. The City is
not capturing the income that they could and should. Recently two home went on the market in Puerta Azul. The ads
for these homes started out by stating "approve for short‐term rentals". I get a weekly call from investor buyers who
would like to buy my home so that can rent it short term. How is this affecting home availability for those wishing to live
2
full time and rent or own in La Quinta? It appears that some in the City are focused primarily on the potential income
from the transient occupancy tax from this proposed project over the many other important considerations especially
the wishes of existing nearby residents.
Traffic Impact for Puerta Azul
7,000 new daily vehicle trips when completed will really impact my community. Currently we have no way to exit the
Puerta Azul community and travel north on Madison without first turning south and doing a u turn. It is similar for the
community south of us. With proposed new traffic signals at 58th and Madison and yet another one 25 yards to the
south of that intersection, one can only envision the traffic congestion created. The main entrance to the proposed
Coral Mountain Resort appears poorly considered when it comes to traffic flow.
Finally, the 2035 La Quinta General Plan appeared to be well thought out and working. I was taught "plan your work ‐
work your plan". If the plan needs to be amended perhaps you should go back to square one and reexamine the whole
plan before considering amendments such as this. Once you make an amendment for someone, are you ready to deal
with the precedent you are creating? The original zoning for this site of low density residential, neighborhood
commercial and a golf course appealed to many of us when we considered moving into this area of La Quinta. Why not
look for a developer who would implement the approved zoning? Perhaps they might even find it appealing to offer two
new Par 3 golf courses instead of an18 hole course especially since there appears to be only one such public Par 3 course
currently in La Quinta.
If you've taken the time to read this, I thank you and wish you well with your deliberations. La Quinta is an exceptional
community to enjoy and live in. Please continue to focus on La Quinta's uniqueness.
Again, I am opposed to the proposed Coral Mountain Resort and the required amendments to the 2035 La Quinta
General Plan.
Sincerely,
Ron Phillips
La Quinta, CA 92253
1
Tania Flores
From:Consulting Planner
Sent:Monday, April 11, 2022 7:50 AM
To:Tania Flores
Cc:Cheri Flores; Danny Castro
Subject:Fw: Water usage in Coral Mountain
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: M Boss
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2022 10:09 AM
To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick
<kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>;
Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro
<dcastro@laquintaca.gov>
Subject: Water usage in Coral Mountain
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when
opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **
I live in Cathedral City but consider water usage in the Coachella Valley to be everyone’s responsibility. Coral Mountain
will be using everyone’s POTABLE water.
This is not right, it is not ethical, it is not for the greater good.
Please do not allow this water project to go forward. Thank you.
Mariellen Boss
Cathedral City, CA 92234
1
Tania Flores
From:Consulting Planner
Sent:Monday, April 11, 2022 7:46 AM
To:Tania Flores
Cc:Cheri Flores; Danny Castro
Subject:Fw: Coral Mountain Wave Park -- Development Input
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Brian Clark
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2022 9:48 PM
To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick
<kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>;
Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro
<dcastro@laquintaca.gov>
Cc:
Subject: Coral Mountain Wave Park ‐‐ Development Input
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Dear La Quinta City Officials,
My name is Shirley Bergeron. I am writing this note on behalf of myself and my husband, Brian Clark. We have been
property owners in La Quinta for almost 12 years (since June 2010) and reside at , part‐time. The
purpose of this letter is to voice our concerns relating to the proposed wave park development south and west of the
intersection of 58th Avenue and Madison Street (a.k.a Coral Mountain Resort). We have been monitoring the
development approval proceedings over the last few months including attendance at the last development review
meeting March 22nd, 2022 at the city hall complex.
We are not satisfied that La Quinta city officials have the best interests of its residents, particularly those residing in
south La Quinta, at heart and we oppose the development as currently proposed. Our areas of concern are as follows:
1) Change of Zoning – La Quinta Master Plan
The 2035 La Quinta general plan has designated this area “low density residential”, consistent with the adjacent land
uses (all four sides). This plan was developed in accordance with California law and planning guidance. One of the
purposes of zoning laws is to concentrate less desirable but necessary new commercial and industrial endeavors in areas
with like existing land uses thereby minimizing unnecessary noise, traffic and other nuisance burdens on residential
areas.
This proposal would change that land use to higher density tourist commercial use. Aside from the sensibility and long
term commercial viability of building a (wave‐based) amusement park in the desert, we find it difficult to understand,
given the multitude of land options elsewhere in the valley, why the city is so anxious to abandon its original thoughtful
plans for this plot of land.
2
2) Traffic Hazards/Loss of Quiet Enjoyment
It is our observation that Madison Street, with the current level of development south of 58th avenue, is a busy street
already. For the residents of those communities north of 58th, one must be very mindful of oncoming traffic at most
times of the day. The possibility of 700+ living units (Phases 1‐3, some homes and some hotel rooms) with the coming
and going of residents and the staff to operate and maintain these units, will create an extraordinary amount of
incremental traffic adding a significant hazard to an otherwise already well used residential thoroughfare. In addition to
the regular additional traffic, we understand that the site will be host to multiple festivals each year which will
presumably generate additional transient visitor and support staff traffic.
3) Additional Water Demand ‐‐ Coachella Valley Aquifer
We recognize that the current land use zoning would create an additional water demand should it proceed per the 2035
plan. However, the water demand for a low density (hopefully desert friendly) residential development would result in
far less demand on the Coachella Valley Aquifer. While we understand the need for drinking water quality for a wave
pool, it seems like a very low value use for this precious and scarce resource. A new low density residential
development could be serviced by non‐potable sources (Colorado R. Water, recycled water, etc) for non‐drinking water
needs.
Perhaps the Coral Mountain Resort could consider purification and reuse of its own sewage to charge the wave basin,
although that may not be something that they would want to use in their marketing materials.
4) Business Model ‐‐ Robustness
While residential development, particularly those with integrated golf and tennis facilities are a tried and tested model
in the Coachella Valley, the longevity of the proposed wave park is a significant unknown. The city’s prospects for
additional meaningful tax revenue, which seem to be driving the desire to abandon the original 2035 plan, have not
been tested or challenged anywhere that I’ve looked in the published materials. This raises the following questions:
1. What is the likelihood for commercial success of this project given other examples?
2. What liabilities could the city end up taking on should the project fail?
3. What security has the developer put in place to cover these end of life liabilities?
Thanks for considering our input to this approval process.
Regards,
Shirley Bergeron/Brian Clark
1
Tania Flores
From:Consulting Planner
Sent:Monday, April 11, 2022 7:47 AM
To:Tania Flores
Cc:Cheri Flores; Danny Castro
Subject:Fw: AGAINST WAVE PARK, LA QUINTA!
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Linda Messeri
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2022 12:54 PM
To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick
<kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>;
Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro
<dcastro@laquintaca.gov>
Subject: AGAINST WAVE PARK, LA QUINTA!
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
It just amazes me that city officials can even consider an enormous wave park right in the middle of our beautiful
community! How many of you live in Andalusia, Trilogy & PGA West? How would you like all the music from 7 am‐10
pm? How about the train machine noise to create the waves? Or the 17 light poles that will be installed to cast
reflections if the water & also take away our beautiful stars at night? How would like it when they can’t sell all the
private memberships & then they offer cheap daily rates to use the wave park? Then we will have bus loads young
adults & families coming into town. More traffic, more crime, more stress on LQ police & sheriffs.
How can you even think of re‐zoning an area in our beautiful neighborhood? Move this massive project out north near
the freeway where it won’t bother your citizens & can still provide the revenue the city is looking to gain!!
SHAME ON YOU FOR EVEN CONSIDERING THIS PROJECT IN THE MIDDLE OF AN UPSCALE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD!!
Dean & Linda Messeri
LQ
--
Linda Messeri
Sent with Airmail
2
Do not push pollution from traffic, noise and air quality into our neighborhoods simply for profit for a few greedy
developers and overvalued City Council members. We, the taxpayers, will be taken to the cleaners by this Project. We
will have to pay for it, not the developers or the City Council who will only profit from this unnecessary and intrusive
project.
Susan L Vaughn
2
3
4
Headlines across the nation continue to decry the ongoing drought while the city councils of our
Valley choose to continue to ignore these headlines and approve with unabated eagerness the
building of wave pools and lagoons...snowed over by pedantic words of technological sustainability,
cache phrases of wellness, retreats and most importantly, being good neighbors. We've expounded
on what good neighbors are, and it's definitely not the CM people...just recall their "friendly' attitude
with Lisa Castro.
Do the elected women and men of these councils truly represent us? Totally questionable as the
consulting planning company and the applicant are given unlimited time to present their ambitious,
professionally over-hyped project (presumably for the very first time...really)? While we, the public are
given 3 minutes to present opposing facts and opinions, Perhaps this is the norm for city councils and
planning commission meetings but it sure doesn't seem appropriate or even fair. We don't have
millions of dollars to immerse into marketing companies, advertise nationally or submit pro-surfing
articles to national publications. Aren't we deserving of expressing our side equally?
I can't help but seeing smoking guns here...same planning company, same developer, same city
council: shades of Silver Rock? Wasn't this to be finished in 2019? Way, way before the pandemic so
what's the excuse? Look at it now, the hotels are still being framed.
The timeline for Coral Mountain hits 20 years...20 years! Realistically, this will never, ever be
completed as envisioned. I know it, they know it. Economic conditions will change as it always does,
climate change will worsen and other unseen factors will come into play, without doubt.
Once approved and the above plays out, how will you extricate yourselves from this fiasco? By then,
all of you will have earned the scorn of many residents, jeopardized an entire community's tranquility
and pray that your public service days have been forgotten. For the planners and developers, other
projects (hopefully sans water) will allow you to move on as well but you will be remembered.
Of course, I may be wrong, it may turn out to be the best thing ever for South La Quinta but I really
have my doubts that it will ever live up to its potential.
So, pass on this "Wave" gravy train and plan for something that adds true value, not something that
compromises the fragility of this paradise. We entrusted each of you to represent us, not to betray
us.
Thank you,
Derek Wong
La Quinta, CA
1
Tania Flores
From:
Sent:Monday, April 11, 2022 3:25 PM
To:Planning WebMail; Jon McMillen; Cheri Flores
Subject:For immediate consideration
Attachments:April 11 Letter to PC.docx
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
TO: La Quinta Planning Commission
DATE: April 11, 2022
RE: Coral Mountain Wavepark proposal
BOTTOM LINE: Please deny this proposal…and the developer’s attempt to circumvent the City’s
carefully‐considered General Plan
FROM: Bridgett Novak – – La Quinta, CA
Hello,
While I am extremely unnerved by this entire proposal, my paramount concerns are LIGHTS, NOISE and
DEVELOPER SUBTERFUGE.
1) LIGHTS
Thank heaven for Dale Tyerman! He seems truly concerned about the negative impacts of this project
(and there are many). At the commission’s 7‐hour meeting, Mr. Tyerman suggested that the developer
lower the light poles and end surfing at dusk (thus eliminating the need for massive and monstrous
stadium‐style lighting). Great ideas!
I live in Andalusia and whenever I walk or drive around the community at night, I can only see interior
Andalusia lights. I could see the developer’s test lights from my house deep within the community…and
there were only 2 of them! Ambient community lighting is a LOT different than 17 80‐foot towers!
I beg the Planning Commission to make Mr. Tyerman’s suggestions part of its recommendation…or
demand. In order to move this project forward…which I’d prefer you didn’t…but if you do take that
step…please require that the applicant a) lower the light poles…and b) not have night surfing. They
should also reduce the number of lights (if they have any at all)!
The City’s own Planning Consultant said one of the impacts of this project as currently proposed is that it
will block views of Coral Mountain. THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE! This finding should be enough to stop the
project in its tracks (or at least send the developers back to the drawing board). What other community
would allow a historic natural landmark to be blocked by a tourist‐commercial project?! And it won’t
just block views…it will have light poles and glare bouncing off Coral Mountain...which is really a travesty
to all we cherish about living here.
One reason we bought in Andalusia was because of the night skies. The ambient lighting of area
communities is tasteful…on short poles…with an orange hue…and we can’t see them from our
home…compared to the bright, glaring white of the lights they showed during the test.
2) NOISE
I feel the City has totally abandoned us taxpaying homeowners/residents when it comes to this project’s
noise.
I don’t understand why the Planning Commission, City Council and the Consulting Planner are acting as if
noise studies conducted in Leemore have any relevance to this project. Leemore is surrounded by flat
agricultural land. There is nothing there to bounce off of. Here, we have a huge rock wall (Coral
Mountain) that creates echoes like an amphitheater. And hundreds of high‐end retirement‐oriented
homes. The developer should have to provide noise analyses of jet skis; the train‐track, Mad Max‐like
wave‐producing machinery; the loud speakers, etc. in this location to be considered pertinent. Leemore
noise studies have no relevance. This location is where they’re proposing this outrageous project.
And If the loud speakers aren’t going to be used, as John Gamlin ludicrously claimed (saying they’d put
up illuminated boards instead), where are the studies on those? How large will they be? From how far
away will they be visible (when illuminated and not illuminated)? What will their illuminated hours be?
It is interesting that the developer uses Leemore as a comparison when they think it is to their
advantage…like in water usage…though those numbers are also being challenged…but not when it
shows what a bad idea this project is for this particular site…like when talking about lights and noise. I’ve
never seen a developer of such a huge consequential project get such a smile and a nod pass from City
protector‐planners. Please stand up to them on these issues!
3) DEVELOPER SUBTERFUGE
I’m so glad one of the commissioners asked about the reality of the developer’s renderings. I’ve asked
the “Desert Sun” to stop running the developer’s fantasy‐like drawings when discussing this project and
to, instead, include pictures of the facility and machinery at Leemore, because that would show what
this will really look like. The developer’s renderings are outrageously idealized. People walking around a
blue, still lagoon with paddlers floating quietly. Really?
Did you notice any cars or parking spots in John Gamlin’s slides? No! Not even for the public market…or
bodega, as he poetically called it. Where are all the so‐called bodega customers, hotel guests,
homeowners, and renters supposed to park?!? Aren’t they supposed to provide accurate drawings??
And conform to a proscribed ratio of parking spots per residents, visitors and workers? Let’s demand
much more realistic drawings…before advancing this project!
Their drawings should also be required to show what the wavepark machinery really looks like. With its
huge train tracks rolling back and forth. One reporter for a surf magazine described it as a “Mad Max‐
like contraption”. Another put it like this:
“On my only visit to Kelly Slater’s Surf Ranch in central California, I was appalled by the
lumbering, noisy freight train that thundered across the valley to deliver the wave.”
Source: Reporter Phil Jarratt ‐ https://www.philjarratt.com/about ‐ who has written several
articles and a book about Kelly Slater.
And there are jet skis running continuously from one end to the other (accompanying each and every
surfer). Leemore also has constant loud speakers…which John Gamlin said will have no impact. Really?
Come on Planning Commission. Please do your job! Make the developer provide us with realistic
drawings, projections, noise, and light analyses…not what they have decided will make the project look
good!
By the way, despite what Garrett Simon contended, the questions about possible wavepark failure are
legitimate. I’ve read a lot of articles by surfers who have surfed Leemore…and most of them say it is a
one‐time splurge. Once you do it…you don’t have to do it again. It’s a “one and done” kind of thing. The
beauty of the sport is finding and trying different waves in the ocean. Not having the perfect wave
manufactured for you.
Even the so‐called inspiration for this project, surfing star Kelly Slater, voiced this sentiment:
“I think people are bored with it (Surf Ranch at Leemore). The same wave over and
over again. I think people like that excitement of what might happen in the ocean;
what wave might come. A big part of the skill of a surfer is learning how to read the
conditions better than someone else.” “…it becomes a little bit monotonous for
people because they feel like they know what they’re going to see ahead of time.”
Source: https://www.theinertia.com/surf/kelly‐slater‐covid‐19‐surf‐ranch‐retirement‐mma‐
ariel‐helwani‐interview/
Please don’t approve this crazy, fantastical, unrealistic project in our beautiful, peaceful, dark, and quiet
corner of the desert.
P.S. Regarding the few locals who have shown up to support this project, please direct them to the 3
other waveparks that are being planned in the Coachella Valley – two of which, I believe, will actually
allow public participation, unlike the proposal at Coral Mountain which will be totally private (to
residents, renters, hotel guests, and invited guests only). Make sure these people realize that their
dreams of surfing at this development are totally unrealistic!
1
Tania Flores
From:Eric Stern
Sent:Monday, April 11, 2022 10:13 AM
To:Tania Flores; Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Consulting
Planner; Jon McMillen; Danny Castro; Cheri Flores
Subject:Coral Mountain Wave Development public comment
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Dear La Quinta Planning Commission members,
I write to express my opposition to the change in zoning of a 386 acre parcel of land at the base of
Coral Mountain west of Madison Street between Avenues 58 and 60. As you well know, this
would be a change from Low Density Residential/Golf course to
Tourist/Commercial/Residential/Open Recreation for the proposed Wave Park by Coral
Mountain Wave Development.
I attended the March 2022 planning commission meeting in person, with an open mind. I
have to say, my initial impressions of this project were favorable. The developers initially
made quite a compelling case for the project. It seemed new and exciting, with all the glitz
and glamour of a slickly produced Hollywood production. But after listening carefully to the
many hours of public comment, after seeing the nitty gritty details of this shiny new toy
exposed to greater scrutiny, after absorbing the surrounding media coverage, after
gaining a more in depth appreciation for the scope of this and other similar projects in the
Coachella Valley, my view has changed from support to opposition.
I was struck by the overwhelming public opposition and lack of public supporting
comments. I suspect and hope that your commission and hopefully the developers were
too.
Despite the proposed mitigations, the developers seem to me to have tunnel vision, act
tone deaf to the neighboring public, and locked in to an idea for a project that, while once
cool and exciting, is now clearly misguided. The money trail (enticements?) for this
project, especially around the revenues produced by the STVRs concerns me that
perverse incentives are at play, leading me to consider any staff/leadership support for
this project to be short-sighted and dubious.
This commission is to be commended for the ongoing detailed analysis and deliberations.
My perception from in person attendance at this March 2022 meeting was that the zoning
change was a "done deal" and the meeting performative. It is my fervent hope that after
2
adequate time to reflect on the vocal public opposition and after further consideration, the
commission heard the public loud and clear, and will do the right thing and recommend
the request for zoning change be denied. No one wants to see an albatross or white
elephant created in our city, and it is my fear that that is exactly what will happen. The
developers, in concert with the commission, should be encouraged to take a step back
and reassess their motivations, ideas, incentives, and plans to better suit this low density,
residential jewel of a parcel of land in south La Quinta.
I now wholeheartedly agree with the mantra: of the opposition: THIS IS THE WRONG PROJECT IN
THE WRONG LOCATION AT THE WRONG TIME.
Eric Stern
La Quinta, CA
92253
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 2:37 PM Tania Flores <tflores@laquintaca.gov> wrote:
Good afternoon,
You can send correspondence related to the upcoming Public Hearing regarding Coral Mountain
Resort to my email directly. Once received I will send a confirmation and copy appropriate
staff.
Thank you.
Tania Flores | Administrative Technician
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760)777-7023
TFlores@LaQuintaCA.gov
3
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
City Hall is now open to the public during normal business hours. Please follow all CDC and State
recommended guidelines as they pertain to COVID-19 safety and awareness. All public services continue
to be available via phone, email or online web portal and the public is encouraged to utilize these services
when possible. Thank you.
From: Eric Stern <estern@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 5, 2022 1:49 PM
To: Planning WebMail <Planning@laquintaca.gov>
Subject: Contact question
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Hello,
Would this be the correct email address to send a letter in opposition to the proposed zoning changes for the wave
park?
Thank you,
Eric Stern
1
Tania Flores
From:K S
Sent:Monday, April 11, 2022 12:52 PM
To:Tania Flores
Cc:Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Consulting Planner; Jon
McMillen; Danny Castro; Cheri Flores
Subject:Re: Coral Mountain Wave Development public comment
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Dear La Quinta Planning Commission members,
I am writing to express my opposition to the change in zoning of a 386 acre parcel of land at the
base of Coral Mountain west of Madison Street between Avenues 58 and 60. This change from a
Low Density Residential/Golf course to Tourist/Commercial/Residential/Open Recreation for the
proposed Wave Park (by Coral Mountain Wave Development) is not in the
best interest of La Quinta or its residents.
Strong public opposition and questionable financial outcomes, on top of competitive
projects nearby, including the Thermal Beach Club & Wave Pool (Avenue 66 on Kohl
Ranch) and DSRT Surf in Palm Desert, suggest this will not be successful venture and La
Quinta will be bailing out the developer when it fails. This project is clearly
misguided.
Although the commission is to be commended for the ongoing analysis and deliberations,
my perception from the March 2022 meeting was that the zoning change was a "done
deal" and the meeting performative. Hopefully, after further consideration and after
hearing the strong public opposition, the commission will "do the right thing" and
recommend the request for zoning change be denied. The developers, in concert with
the commission, should be encouraged to take a step back and reassess their
motivations, ideas, incentives, and plans to better suit this low density, residential jewel of
a parcel of land in south La Quinta.
I now wholeheartedly agree with the mantra: of the opposition: THIS IS THE WRONG PROJECT IN
THE WRONG LOCATION AT THE WRONG TIME.
Karen Stern
La Quinta, CA
2
92253
Good afternoon,
You can send correspondence related to the upcoming Public Hearing regarding Coral Mountain
Resort to my email directly. Once received I will send a confirmation and copy appropriate
staff.
Thank you.
Tania Flores | Administrative Technician
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760)777-7023
TFlores@LaQuintaCA.gov
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
City Hall is now open to the public during normal business hours. Please follow all CDC and State
recommended guidelines as they pertain to COVID-19 safety and awareness. All public services
continue to be available via phone, email or online web portal and the public is encouraged to utilize
these services when possible. Thank you.
3
‐‐
Ren Stern
Cell:
1
Tania Flores
From:Sandra Stratton
Sent:Monday, April 11, 2022 5:42 PM
To:Tania Flores
Subject:Commissioner Meeting April 12
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper
judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for
information. **
Please circulate my comments to the commissioners and City Council.
Thank you
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The CVWD is considering implementing Actions 2 & 3 from their Water Shortage Contingency
Plan of June, 2021. They are considering a ban on daytime spray irrigation and other
considerations(?).
Level 3 also restricts filling swimming pools. While they have not mentioned that restriction, it is
in Level 3. Clearly they MAY be seeing the light that this severe drought we are experiencing
requires action. This contradicts their approval of filling the Wave Pool Basin!
Wave pool or swimming pool. They both use potable water.
I fail to understand why anyone can in good conscience would approve the Wave Pool for the
rich when we have a severe drought. Spring has NOT brought needed snow or water.
Please deny this project.
Sandy Stratton
La Quinta
Sent from my iPad
1
Tania Flores
From:Nicole Criste
Sent:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 5:47 PM
To:Tania Flores; Cheri Flores
Subject:Fwd: Coral Mountain Resort - is there enough water?
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any typos!
Begin forwarded message:
From: Colin Barrows
Date: April 12, 2022 at 5:02:52 PM PDT
To: levans@laquintaca.gov, rradi@laquintaca.gov, kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov, jpena@laquintaca.gov,
ssanchez@laquintaca.gov, ncriste@laquintaca.gov, jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov, dcastro@laquintaca.gov
Subject: Coral Mountain Resort ‐ is there enough water?
Thank you for taking the time to review comments related to the proposed Coral Mountain Resort. I
prepared the following comments and presentation slide containing photographic references to the
topics discussed before receiving the planning commission agenda. Even though I have made previous
comment on this topic, I hope you will find it informative to the decision‐making process.
Slides: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d3xNRejuNSmFRTPjLED HBG12hXWuN7b/view?usp=sharing
During the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting on March 22, 2022, questions were raised about the
water use of the proposed Coral Mountain Resort, which by their own estimates will consume more
than three hundred million gallons (312,370,000) of water each year. The response by city staff,
regarding water use planning by local water districts, was as follows (emphasis mine):
“They have, through the years, been very wise and very aggressive about their recharge efforts. They
have recharge ponds all over the valley, for the upper basin and the lower basin, and have very
aggressively recharged the basin in years when they could, to the point where they reversed the
overdraft condition that occurred in the mid 2010s.”
‐ La Quinta City Staff
This statement is directly contradicted by publicly available documents published by the Coachella
Valley Water District. According to the report, “The State of the Coachella Valley Aquifer”, jointly
prepared by the Coachella Valley Water District and the Desert Water Authority: “Currently,
groundwater levels are declining.” Source: https://www.cvwd.org/DocumentCenter/View/77/CVWD‐
DWA‐The‐State‐of‐the‐Coachella‐Valley‐Aquifer‐PDF
2
The most recent available annual report prepared under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
for the Indio Subbasin of the Coachella Valley aquifer also contradicts La Quinta city staff. Their figures
show an overdraft of the aquifer in water year 2019‐2020 of 29,803 acre feet, or almost ten billion
gallons (9,711,000,000). Source:
https://sgma.water.ca.gov/portal/alternative/annualreport/9
The Coachella Valley Water district is upfront about the reason for this overdraft, stating on their
website that “regulatory restrictions and drought have limited the districts’ access to its imported water
entitlements in recent years.” Source: http://www.cvwd.org/162/Groundwater‐Replenishment‐
Imported‐Water
Therefore, as long as drought persists, there will not be enough water for the Coral Mountain Resort, let
alone many other essential uses ‐ farming, drinking water, and sanitation ‐ throughout the Coachella
Valley. Instead of accepting real world conditions, project proponents are asking us to hope conditions
will change in the future. From the Planning Commission meeting on March 22:
“Those analyses are prepared based on both a very long history, and a very complex future modeling
effort,”
‐ La Quinta City Staff
I find the reliance on modeling for water availability projections to be insufficient, a view shared by Dr.
Andrew Schwartz, lead scientist and station manager at the UC Berkeley Central Sierra Snow Lab. In an
essay published by The New York Times on April 4, 2022, he wrote “[...] these models suffer from the
same simplistic view of drought and water, and they are in dire need of an update.” Source:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/04/opinion/environment/california‐drought‐wildfires.html
Until more accurate water models can be developed and tested, the only responsible course of action is
to trust our own eyes. Take a tour of water in the Coachella Valley today and you will find cause for
serious and immediate concern. The Whitewater River Groundwater Replenishment Facility, at over 900
acres, has been empty since at least August 2021, and the Mission Creek Replenishment Facility has
been empty since 2012. The Whitewater River Channel, which in past years has brought snow melt from
the peaks of Mount San Gorgonio to the valley, is dry at the surface, and the Salton Sea is rapidly
becoming a public health crisis as the sea level drops.
In conclusion, I continue to urge the Planning Commission to deny the Coral Mountain Resort proposal.
For better or worse, the world we’re living in now is different from the one past generations grew up in,
and the pace of change is only increasing. When making decisions about if, where, and how to build a
house, a golf course, or a surf park in the desert, the option to ignore reality is quickly disappearing.
Instead, I hope all members of our community are able to proactively embrace climate resilient
planning, and work together to find innovative and equitable solutions to the unprecedented
environmental challenges facing us.
Thank you again for your time. If any city staff, planning commission, or council members would like to
see some of the key water landmarks in person, I would be pleased to offer a guided tour so you can see
them for yourselves.
Colin Barrows
1
Tania Flores
From:Tracy Bartlett
Sent:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 2:21 PM
To:Alena Callimanis; Tania Flores; Cheri Flores
Subject:RE: Cheri, Tania, we respectfully ask Cactus to Cloud to present rightafter us
Attachments:Tracy - Coral Mountain Comments.pdf
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Cherie and Tania,
My apologies for getting this to you so late but I do have 5 slides to add for my presentation. Am attaching the file in PDF
only because that is how it saved. I am not certain that we will have anyone but myself and Sendy who will be speaking.
Thank you so much,
Sincerely,
Tracy Bartlett
Sent from Mail for Windows
From: Alena Callimanis
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2022 11:40 AM
To: Tania Flores; Cheri Flores
Cc:
Subject: Cheri, Tania, we respectfully ask Cactus to Cloud to present rightafter us
Cheri and Tania, Cactus to Cloud is a La Quinta organization that is dedicated to protecting wildlife, landscape and
communities of the desert.
Since they complement our group’s mission, we would like to respectfully ask that they follow us in the order of public
speaking.
Tracy Bartlett is organizing their comments. They are in the process of confirming comments and speakers because
some of the speakers did present last time and they are mindful of the speaker requirements.
Tracy’s current order is:
Colin Barrows
Tracy Bartlett
Sendy Barrows
Thank you very much for your consideration of letting Cactus to Cloud speak right after us.
Alena Callimanis
LQRRD
2
1
Tania Flores
From:Brenda Fisher
Sent:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 8:56 PM
To:Tania Flores
Subject:LQ Private Surf Park Concerns
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Hello,
My name is Brenda Fisher and I have lived in the Coachella Valley for 29 years. I am currently a student at ASU finishing up a major in
Conservation Biology and Ecology and minoring in Sustainability.
I am concerned about the development of the Coral Mountain Resort Private Surf Park. It has come to my attention that the Environmental
Impact Report was found lacking as the resort infringes on important Bighorn habitat. This private surf resort has a negative impact on the
Coral Mountain area like irreplaceable petroglyphs and other cultural features important to the Cahuilla people. A resort like this also takes
away from the minimalist feel of the desert where locals and visitors come to enjoy the natural beauty and explore the many hiking trails
and landscape that is unique to this beautiful place.
The EIR reported that it will use 958.63 acre‐feet of water per year which is equivalent to over 300 million gallons a year! As a student of
Conservation and Sustainability, I recognize that we are in a water crisis especially here in the valley due to low rain fall (from drought and
Climate Change) and competing stakeholders of the Colorado River. This amount of water could efficiently sustain half of the residents of
the Coachella Valley, most importantly those marginalized in our community.
The cultural, recreational, historical and habitat value of this area must be respected.
Thank you,
Brenda Fisher
She/her
1
Tania Flores
From:Consulting Planner
Sent:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 3:06 PM
To:Jon McMillen; Linda Evans; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; Robert Radi; Steve Sanchez; Nancy French; Tania
Flores
Subject:Re: AGAINST Coral Mountain Resort private surf park development
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Ms. French,
Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the Planning Commission and City Council as they
consider this application at hearing.
Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Nancy French
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2022 3:03 PM
To: Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Linda Evans
<Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>;
Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>
Subject: AGAINST Coral Mountain Resort private surf park development
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Hello my name is Nancy French from Bayberry Lane, La Quinta.
I am a full-time resident and homeowner and my 77 year old parents are full-time residents and homeowners in the Desert
Pride neighborhood in La Quinta.
We, as a family are adamantly against the Coral Mountain Resort private surf park development.
Encouraging residents to curtail their water use, and we comply, while this park would unnaturally hoard enough water to
sustain more than 30,000 residents - almost a tenth of the population of the entire Coachella Valley - sets a very poor
example and breeds mistrust in your constituents.
Unlike residential developments that were considered controversial when they were proposed in the past - this is a
business relying on a trend. We've seen so many local businesses and attractions close down these past 2+ years. Right
now there are four wave pools proposed within an hour drive of one another, with locations at Wet ’n’ Wild Palm Springs
(Palm Springs Surf Club), Desert Willow Golf Resort (DSRT SURF), Thermal Beach Club and this one. - what happens
when this huge endeavor fails and leaves a gaping eyesore in the town? A titanic monument to bad city planning
reminding you that you should have listened to your residents. This type of attraction is more suited for a coastal
community where the surf culture already exists and where salt water could be used instead of wasting our precious
resource.
To infer - as the developer did at the beginning of his presentation tonight - that NOT allowing this "leisure" attraction puts
the community at financial risk or risk of becoming irrelevant - is ridiculous and fear based.
According to the IBA World Tour website and surfhungry.com the “Surf Ranch Experience” costs about $10,000, although
you can pick the deal that works for you. Premium tier guests pay more for the experience, and there is a booking fee in
addition. Sources say that every wave costs around $450 on average. The Valley population may be getting gradually
2
younger, but we are close enough to the ocean that we do not need a fake version of it in our back yard. This amusement
park will not be assessible to low-income kids who've never seen the beach.
Most importantly this park's footprint, construction, water usage, earthquake risk and light pollution interferes with the
wildlife that is vital to the local ecosystem and which is an actual attraction already enjoyed by a majority of it's citizens,
tourists and those of us who work to preserve and encourage these animals to be part of our neighborhood. The
"wellness" activities the developer touts as "amenities" for an exclusive membership are already being enjoyed in our
beautiful town within the natural landscape.
According to an article on surfer.com and Wired magazine: the Surf Ranch in Lemoore is filled with 15 million gallons of
UV-and-chlorine-treated water — 250,000 of which can evaporate from the lagoon on an extremely hot day"
the article goes on to say "even if surf parks continue to find increasingly creative ways to mitigate their environmental
impact, you cannot build anything without at least some degree of impact."
We love the desert, we love La Quinta and we don't need a surf park. Please do not approve the rezoning application.
Thank you for you time and compassion.
2
I realize there are other concerns that others have raised, such as housing, the obvious traffic issues,
the impact on lighting and the night skies, and other environmental issues. I concur with all those, but
the reality is that even if the developer addressed all of those satisfactorily, the City is still left with the
inescapable water issue. That cannot be fixed. It cannot ever be addressed satisfactorily. At a time
when the drought is here to stay, when the residential water rates are sure to rise, when every
resident is being told to conserve, when cities in the Southwest are rationing water, when the
Colorado River and its tributaries are at 100-year lows… this is not the time for La Quinta to
invite such a water wasteful project.
Please vote no.
Thank you for your consideration.
John Guerrini
1
Tania Flores
From:Jim Lambert
Sent:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 12:48 PM
To:Tania Flores; Jim - Barb Lambert
Subject:Coral Mountain Surf Pool Written Comments
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
We object to this project going forward. With massive use of water for a
water park, private pools, water features, it goes beyond our
comprehension on why the planning committee and council might want
this project with the way it is, to be approved. With CVWD and the State
of California telling us about the extreme drought and future cut back on
water for single homes, it is especially ludicrous to build the huge water
park.
On top of that, the 80 foot high light fixtures shining down and reflecting
on the water at night will have a negative effect on the surrounding area.
It is much more suitable to have the original plan of a golf course with
homes than this massive surf pool. And what about the noise of that surf
pool with the machines making the waves?
Barbara and Jim Lambert
La Quinta
Agenda number 1
Against development of Wave Park
1
Tania Flores
From:laura mendoza
Sent:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 3:58 PM
To:Jon McMillen; Consulting Planner; Tania Flores; Linda Evans; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Robert
Radi; Steve Sanchez
Subject:NO to the Surfpark
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Hi I realize my comments may be too late to be included in the record, but as a Coachella VAlley resident, I oppose this
idea of a surf park in our valley.
We are experiencing the WORSTt drought in our history. Climate CHange is upon us bigtime. We need every drop of
water for our residents as it is. This is ludicrous, wasteful, unsustanable to say the least and frankly, crazy.
Please do the responsible thing, as do not allow this plan to proceed.
L Mendoza
Palm Springs, CA
1
Tania Flores
From:Cheri Flores
Sent:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 10:14 AM
To:Tania Flores; Consulting Planner
Cc:Danny Castro
Subject:FW: PUBLIC COMMENT: Randy Roberts - Providing the attached information/article from today re
Lake Powell
Cheri Flores | Planning Manager
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760)777-7023
CLFlores@LaQuintaCA.gov
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
From: Teresa Thompson <Tthompson@laquintaca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2022 10:03 AM
To: Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro <dcastro@laquintaca.gov>
Cc: Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov>
Subject: PUBLIC COMMENT: Randy Roberts ‐ Providing the attached information/article from today re Lake Powell
He requested that the Planning Commission and public be made aware that this new just came out today:
https://www.eenews.net/articles/megadrought‐spurs‐first‐ever‐federal‐colorado‐river‐cutbacks/
Randy Roberts
2
Teresa Thompson | Management Specialist
City Manager's Office
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico ◦ La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
www.laquintaca.gov
www.laquintaca.gov/covid19
www.playinlaquinta.com
As always you can find a full list of resources and information by visiting www.laquintaca.gov
1
Tania Flores
From:Bruce T. Bauer
Sent:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 12:55 PM
To:Consulting Planner; Jon McMillen; Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail
Subject:The Wave Festival Project / Coral Mountain Resort / Letter of April 12, 2022
Attachments:2022 04 12 Supplemental comment letter to City Council re Final EIR.pdf
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Dear Mr. McMillen, Ms. Flores and Ms. Criste:
As you know, our office represents residents in the City of La Quinta (City), La Quinta Residents for Responsible
Development (LQRRD). Please find our letter of today’s date, concerning The Wave Festival Project in consideration of
the Planning Commission’s review of the project at tonight’s meeting.
Please circulate this letter to all pertinent City staff and to the City’s planning commissioners.
Thank you.
Bruce T. Bauer
PALM SPRINGS COSTA MESA SAN DIEGO PRINCETON NEW YORK
____________________________________________
Bruce T. Bauer
Of Counsel
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
1800 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California 92262
Phone (760) 322‐2275 / Fax (760) 322‐2107
https://sbemp.com/
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e‐mail message, together with any documents, files and/or other messages attached to it, is for the sole use of the intended
recipients and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please immediately notify the sender by telephone and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you.
CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the United States Treasury Department, you are hereby informed that any
advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties
under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing.
April 12, 2022
Via Email & U.S. Mail
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
(Planning@LaQuintaCA.gov)
La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: Agenda Item No. 1 (Continued from March 22, 2022), Coral Mountain Resort, Final
Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2021020310)
Dear Chair Nieto and Honorable Commissioners:
As you know, our office represents residents in the City of La Quinta (“City”), La Quinta Residents
for Responsible Development (“LQRRD”). On March 22, 2022, LQRRD submitted comments on
the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2021020310) (“FEIR”) for the Coral Mountain
Resort Project (“Project” and/or “Wave Festival Project”). At the conclusion of the seven hour
meeting, the Planning Commission continued the hearing date and requested additional information.
The Planning Commission was right to continue the hearing. There are a tremendous amount of
unanswered questions surrounding this Project. One of most serious questions the Planning
Commission must ask is why the City of Palm Desert is using a more conservative methodology to
evaluate water usage for its Wave Pool than the City of La Quinta. Specifically, the EIR for the
Palm Desert wave pool project stated that the Wave Festival Project used an “oversimplified
Coachella Valley Water District (“CVWD”) evaporation rate,” and did not account for annual loss
due to backwash, spilling or potential refilling of the wave pool. The City of Palm Desert also
implemented certain mitigation measures to its wave pool project that were not applied to this
Project, including a Turf Reduction Program.
What is even more troubling is that the EIR for the Palm Desert wave pool project was prepared by
Terra Nova Planning & Research (“Terra Nova”). As the Planning Commission may or may not
know, Ms. Nicole Sauviat Cirste, who is the Consulting Planner for the City of La Quinta on the
Wave Festival Project, is also the Vice President, Principal Planner, and Project Manager for Terra
Nova. As discussed more fully below, on February 7, 2022, LQRRD notified the City of serious
ethical concerns it had with Ms. Criste’s failure to include the more “conservative” water usage
BRUCE T. BAUER
ATTORNEY
ADMITTED IN CA
REPLY TO:
1800 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, California 92262
T (760) 322-2275
F (760) 322-2107
bauer@sbemp.com
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 2
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
methodology in the Draft EIR. Specifically, we believe Ms. Criste has violated her ethical
obligations by failing to fully analyze impacts to water consumption after concerns were raised by
an associate in her own environmental firm (Terra Nova) over the methodology used for the Wave
Festival Project. The presentation of conflicting analyses from the same consulting firm, even if the
analyses were performed by different project managers or teams and for different clients, will
inevitably undermine the credibility of the consultant.
To put it another way, how can one calculation method be employed for one Wave Pool (the project
in Palm Desert) and a different calculation method employed for the Wave Festival Project within
the same valley environment by the same Consulting Agency (Terra Nova) and the same water
provider (CVWD)? Shouldn’t water usage be just as important to the City of La Quinta as it is the
the City of Palmdale? To date, LQRRD has never received a response to this letter. Therefore, we
reiterate our demand that the City provide an explanation to these serious allegations.
This supplemental comment letter will also focus on two other issues that need to be addressed
before this Project can proceed. First, LQRRD recently learned that the City has issued permits for a
new development that is literally down the street from the Wave Festival Project. The FEIR fails to
properly analyze the cumulative impacts from this new development.
Frankly, the lack of any analysis for this new development that is adjacent to the Wave Festival
Project is concerning on two fronts. First, the City of La Quinta just recently approved the new
development with no additional environmental review despite relying on an environmental
assessment that is over 19 years old. The City approved this development fully knowing that the
Wave Festival Project was also being considered for development. The City then ignored the
development in the EIR for the Wave Festival Project. What is the City of La Quinta trying to hide?
Finally, since sending our March 22, 2022 comment letter, Governor Newson issued a new drought
executive order that directly impacts the water conservation measures set forth in the FEIR. The
executive order only provides further evidence that drought and the lack of water continues to be a
fundamental concern in California. Although this executive order was not issued at the time the
FEIR was circulated, it will affect the permits issued for the Wave Festival Project. LQRRD
believes that the Project will be unable to meet these new requirements in the future.
I. Ms. Criste Violated Her Ethical Obligations As An Environmental Consultant By
Failing To Fully Analyze Impacts To Water Consumption
A. Two Wave Pool Projects in the Coachella Valley
Developers plan to build two different surf parks in the Coachella Valley – (1) Wave Festival
Project, and (2) DSRT SURF. Terra Nova Planning & Research (“Terra Nova”)1 has been involved
1 There are four members of Terra Nova: (1) John D. Criste, AICP (President/ Principal Planner/ Project Manager); (2)
Nicole Sauviat Criste (Vice President/Principal Planner/Project Manager); (3) Andrea Randall (Senior Planner); and (4)
Kelly Clark (Associate Planner).
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 3
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
in both projects. Nicole Sauviat Criste is a Principal at Terra Nova. She is acting as the Consulting
Planner for the City of La Quinta on the Wave Festival Project. Terra Nova was also retained by the
City of Palm Desert to prepare an EIR and associated addenda to that EIR, for the DSRT SURF
project. A summary of each project is set forth below.
1. DSRT SURF
DSRT SURF is an 18-acre development project at Desert Willow Golf Resort in Palm Desert. The
project consists of the following:
• 5.5-acre surf lagoon and wave machine.
• Surf Center and associated facilities.
• 92 room hotel, and 83 for-sale residential units and Club House.
The Draft and Final EIR for DSRT SURF was prepared by Terra Nova. Based on correspondence
between the City of Palm Desert and Terra Nova, Ms. Criste was one of the consultants who
worked on the project.2 The Water Supply Assessment (“WSA”) was also prepared by Terra Nova.
The Draft EIR was released for public comment on May 21, 2019, and the Final EIR in October
2019. The Project is within the Coachella Valley Water District’s (“CVWD”) boundaries requiring
that it meet water quality requirements in the production and delivery of domestic water and sewage
management. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-4, the EIR
concluded that the Project impacts would be less than significant. The Mitigation Measures are the
following:
• HYD-1: BMPs [Best Management Practices], as described in the Project-specific
WQMP [Water Quality Management Plan], shall be implemented to ensure that
water quality impacts resulting from the Project meet the City’s NPDES [National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System] standards.
• HYD-2: Exposed soil from excavated areas, stockpiles, and other areas where
ground cover is removed shall be stabilized by wetting or other approved means to
avoid or minimize the inadvertent transport by wind or water.
• HYD-3: The Project shall be subject to NPDES Construction General Permit
requirements.
• HYD-4: The Turf Reduction Program shall be completed prior to the issuance of
certificates of occupancy for the surf center.
The Turf Reduction Program (i.e., HYD-4) is in reference to California Governor’s Executive Order
B-29-15 passed on April 1, 2015.3 This program directs the California Department of Water
2 For example, on July 5, 2019, Eric Ceja, Principal Planner for the City of Palm Desert, emailed Ms. Criste with
comments from the Airport Land Use Commission. (DSRT SURF Final EIR, at p. 45.)
3 California Drought - Executive Order B-29-15, Directive #3, April 1, 2015 (Turf Replacement Initiative).
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 4
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
Resources (“DWR”) to lead a statewide initiative, in partnership with local agencies, to collectively
replace 50 million square feet of lawns and ornamental turf with drought tolerant landscapes.
The Turf Reduction Program dramatically reduced water consumption for the DSRT SURF Project.
Without the Program, the Project would require approximately 88.32 AFY of water at buildout of
both the lagoon and surf center and approximately 76.89 AFY of water for the Hotel and Villas
Planning Area, resulting in a total demand approximately 165.21 AFY of water at buildout. This is
approximately 0.14 percent of CVWD’s anticipated 2020 total urban water demand of 114,600 AF,
and approximately 0.09 percent of CVWD’s anticipated 2040 total urban water demand of 194,300
AF. However, after applying the water demand offsets associated with implementation of the
proposed turf reduction program at the Desert Willow Golf Course (106.75 AFY) provided in
Mitigation Measure HYD-4, the net total water demand for the Project is expected to be 58.46 AFY.
On November 14, 2019, the City Council approved the DSRT SURF Specific Plan (SP), Precise
Plan (PP), and Tentative Tract Map (TTM) by Resolution 2019-82 and adopted Resolution No.
2019-83 certifying an EIR, SCH No. 2019011044, Mitigated Monitoring and Reporting Program,
and adopted a Statement of Overriding Consideration in evaluating potentially adverse
environmental impacts. The land use allowances in the Specific Plan included a six-acre surf
lagoon, up to 350 hotel rooms, and 88 residential villas.
On February 4, 2021, Desert Wave Ventures, LLC, applied for amendments to the approved SP, PP,
and TTM, including an addendum to the EIR for the development of a 5.5-acre surf lagoon and surf
center facilities, 92 hotel rooms, 83 residential units, circulation, parking, and landscaping
constructed on 17.69 acres within the Desert Willow Golf Resort, and an off-site parking location in
close proximity.
On November 11, 2021, a memorandum was issued by associate planner Kelly Clark of Terra Nova
to Eric Ceja of the City of Palm Desert regarding the water demand analysis for DSRT SURF (the
“TN Memo”). In the TN Memo, Terra Nova states the following regarding the Wave Festival
Project:
Similar projects in the Valley, specifically the Wave at Coral
Mountain in La Quinta (the “Wave”) used an oversimplified CVWD
evaporation rate for the wave pool based on a ‘Plant Factor of 1.10 for
a stationary body of water and 1.20 for a moving body of water’. The
analysis does not appear to account for annual loss due to backwash,
spilling or potential refilling of the wave pool. Compared to the La
Quinta Wave Festival Project, DSRT SURF used conservative water
demand estimates that assume that the surf lagoon will require
complete filling each year, accounts for water loss due to backwash
and spillage, and uses historical weather data to account for monthly
temperatures, humidity, wind, cloud cover, and solar radiation that
affect evaporation rates. (Emphasis added.)
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 5
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
The Project was approved by City Council on January 27, 2022.
2. The Wave Festival Project
The Wave Festival Project consists of 929 acres in total. Of that, 543 acres occur on the east side of
Madison Street, and will continue to develop as provided under SP 03-067, as a residential and golf
country club. The western portion of the project, on the west side of Madison Street, proposes the
development of the approximately 386-acre area. This portion of the project would be developed
under a new Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002) with up to 496 low density residential units on 232.3
acres; a resort hotel with up to 150 keys and complementary resort uses and amenities, a
recreational Wave Basin facility, 104 resort residential units, and 57,000 square feet of commercial
development on 120.8 acres; 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses on 7.7 acres, and
open space recreational uses on approximately 23.6 acres.
The applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2019-0002), Zone
Change (ZC 2019-0004), Specific Plan Amendment (SP 03-067), Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002),
Tentative Tract Map (TTM 2019-0005), Site Development Permit (SDP 2021-0001), and
Development Agreement (DA 2021-0002), as a part of the entitlement process.
The Draft and Final EIR for the Wave Festival Project was prepared by MSA Consulting, Inc.
However, Ms. Criste/Terra Nova is a Consulting Planner on the Project. Water supply for the
proposed project would be provided by the CVWD. (DEIR, at 4.9-19.) The project is expected to
consume approximate 958.63-acre feet per year (AFY). (DEIR, at 4.9-19.)
The Draft EIR was released for public comment on June 22, 2021, and the Final EIR in February
2022. Unlike the DSRT SURF project, NO mitigation measures were proposed for Hydrology and
Water Quality. For unknown reasons, the City of La Quinta is not requiring a Turf Reduction
Program, which could greatly reduce the water consumption for the Project. To date, the Final EIR
and related entitlements have not been approved.
B. Ethical Obligations for Environmental Professionals
The California Association of Environmental Professionals (“AEP”)4 follows a Code of Ethics5 for
it environmental consultants. They include the following:
1. I will conduct myself and my work in a manner that will uphold the values, integrity,
and respect of the profession.
4 AEP was founded in 1974 as non-profit association of public and private sector professionals with a common interest
in serving the principles underlying the California Envi ronmental Quality Act (CEQA). The specific and primary
purposes of the association are to establish and operate a professional association of persons involved in and committed
to improving the processing and implementation of environmental assessment, analysis, public disclosure, and
reporting.
5 Here is a link to AEP Code of Ethics: https://www.califaep.org/aep code of ethics.php
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 6
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
2. I will uphold the stated intent as well as the letter of environmental policies, laws,
and regulations which are adopted by governmental bodies or agencies.
3. I will not engage in, encourage, or condone dishonesty, fraud, deceit, discrimination,
harassment, or misrepresentation in the solicitation, preparation, or use of work
prepared by me or under my direction.
4. I will fully disclose to my employers and my prospective clients any economic or
ethical interests which could reasonably be interpreted as a conflict of interest by
them or by other affected parties with regard to my professional work.
5. I will ensure a good faith effort at full disclosure, technical accuracy, sound
methodology, clarity, and objectivity in the collection, analysis, interpretation, and
presentation of environmental information by me or under my direction.
6. I will achieve and maintain the highest level of professional competency for myself
and require the same for those I supervise.
7. I will conduct myself at all AEP- sponsored, hosted or supported events with
integrity and respect.
8. I will avoid harassment of all types in my written and in-person interactions when
attending or participating in AEP- sponsored, hosted or supported events.
(Emphasis added)
A key component of the AEP’s Code of Ethics is its provisions seeking to ensure the validity of
data and guard against its misrepresentation. No cases squarely impose a fiduciary duty on an
environmental consultant, but cases involving other types of professionals (typically lawyers and
accountants), consultants, and contractors provide legal support by analogy. Environmental
consultants are skilled professionals who must meet certain minimum standards of care in the
provision of professional services to their clients. A fiduciary relation exists between two persons
when one of them is under a duty to act for or to give advice for the benefit of another upon matters
within the scope of the relation. (Knox v. Dean (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 417, 432-433).
The presentation of conflicting analyses to the agency by the same consulting firm, even if the
analyses were performed by different project managers or teams and for different clients, will
inevitably undermine the credibility of the consultant. To avoid such problems before they arise,
environmental consultants are bound by the Code of Ethics described above. An environmental
consultant owes its client several duties, including a potential fiduciary duty. Its ability to discharge
these duties may be affected by conflicts of interest that can arise when the consultant works for two
or more different clients.
Here, Terra Nova worked on two separate wave pool/resort projects in the Coachella Valley over
the last few years – the DSRT SURF Project and the Wave Festival Project. On November 11,
2021, while both projects were still undergoing environmental review, Ms. Clark at Terra Nova
prepared the TN Memorandum to the Principal Planner at the City of La Quinta discussing DSRT
SURF’s water demand analysis. As set forth above, Ms. Clark advised that the Wave Festival
Project “used an oversimpfied CVWD evaporation rate for the wave pool” based on a “Plant Factor
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 7
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
of 1.10 for a stationary body of water, and 1.20 for a moving body of water.” Terra Nova further
stated that the Wave Festival Project failed to “account for annual loss due to backwash, spilling, or
potential refilling of the wave pool.” She went on to state that DSRT SURF “used conservative
water demand estimates that assume the surf lagoon will require complete filing each year, accounts
for water loss due to backwash and spillage, and uses historical weather data to account for monthly
temperatures, humidity, wind, cloud cover, and solar radiation that affect evaporation rates.”
The Wave Festival Project’s DEIR, prepared under the oversight of Ms. Criste, did not include such
a detailed review of water consumption. It appears that a very different approach was taken
regarding the projected Project water consumption, particularly with respect to the wave basin. In
fact, the City of La Quinta issued a DEIR that states the following:
The findings of the WSA/WSV [Water Supply Assessment/Water
Supply Verification] determined that there will be sufficient water
supplies to meet the demands of the proposed project, and future
demands of the project, plus all forecasted demands in the next 20
years. This is based on the volume of water available in the aquifer,
CVWD's Colorado River contract supply, water rights and water
supply contracts, and CVWD’s commitment to eliminate overdraft
and reduce per capita water use in CVWD’s service area.
(DEIR, at 4.9-28.)
Water usage was a hot-button topic during the planning and public hearing processes for the DSRT
SURF Project (as it is in the Wave Festival Project). Doug Sheres, founding partner at Beach Street
Development and Desert Wave Ventures, stated:
“The water issue is a critical piece and our signature ‘turf for surf’
program is a unique and effective way to offset water use. We are
removing over 1 million square feet of non-play golf course and
replacing it with native and drought-tolerant landscapes.
This will reduce water use on the golf course by almost 34 million
gallons per year and more than offset our lagoon water use of roughly
24 million gallons per year. It’s incredible to think that this project
covers 18 acres, encompasses 83 homes with 50 attached lock-off
units, 92 hotel rooms, restaurants, bars, and a 5.5-acre body of water
and the whole thing uses less water than is required for 58 homes.
While the surfing component of this project is very special, we hope
the water conservation measures can help set an example for future
development in surf and beyond.”6
6 “DSRT Surf Gets the Official Go-Ahead, Construction to Start Soon,” WAVEPOOLMAG, (written by Neil
Armstrong, January 29, 2022.)
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 8
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
How can one calculation method be employed for one Wave Pool (DSRT SURF Project) and a
different calculation method employed for the Wave Festival Project within the same valley
environment by the same Consulting Agency (Terra Nova) and the same water provider (CVWD)?
Ms. Criste was working on both projects at the time the TN Memorandum was circulated.
Ms. Criste, as a principal of Terra Nova, must have been aware of the contents of the TN Memo in
November 2021, indicating that the Wave Festival Project’s analysis was inaccurate in many
aspects. It is not clear, then, why this information and important concerns were not contained in the
DEIR. This information is material – by the admission of the City’s own consultant - and critically
important to the City’s review of the Wave Festival Project.
In addition, why did the City of Palm Desert impose four mitigation measures, where no mitigation
measures are proposed for the Wave Festival Project? As discussed above, HYD-4 (the Turf
Reduction Program) will dramatically reduce water consumption in the DSRT SURF. Specifically,
total water demand for the Project would be reduced from 165.21 AFY of water at buildout to 58.46
AFY after applying the water demand offsets associated with implementation of the proposed turf
reduction program at the Desert Willow Golf Course.
In contrast, the Wave Festival Project is expected to consume approximately 958.63-acre feet per
year (AFY). (DEIR, at 4.9-19.) Despite this enormous use of water, the City of La Quinta has
proposed no Turf Reduction Program or other mitigation measures to reduce this water usage. It is
unclear why Ms. Criste proposed these mitigations measure for one surf pool project but not the
other.
Based on the Code of Ethics, it is reasonable to expect that a Consulting Planner for any project
would ensure that the EIR and all related documents are prepared utilizing accurate and verifiable
field techniques. She should have verified that the EIR documents represent their complete and
independent judgment and analysis, and in this case, given the timing of the release of this TN
Memo, this was not done. Doesn’t the residents of La Quinta deserve the “conservative” method
approach used in Palm Desert? The City of La Quinta should ask these important questions before
approving this Project.
Mayor Evans has repeatedly stated and continuously assured us that the CEQA process will be
diligently followed for the Wave Festival Project. Proceeding on the flawed and inaccurate water
consumption analysis presented in the DEIR will negatively impact the quality of life for the citizens
of the City.
II. The FEIR Fails to Analyze the Cumulative Impacts Of A New Development Immediately
Adjacent to the Wave Festival Project
The FEIR does not properly analyze cumulative impacts, since it has failed to analyze a new
development literally just down the street from the Wave Festival Project. Beazer Homes Holdings,
LLC (“Beazer Homes”) Cantera at Coral Mountain (“Cantera Development”) is a housing
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 9
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
development located on the south side of Avenue 58 approximately ½ mile west of Madison Street.
The Cantera Development is immediately adjacent to the Wave Festival Project, and is currently
pre-selling single-story homes in La Quinta. Here is a map of the specific location (the gray legend
in the northern area of the map is the Cantera Development):
This development has been in the works since 2003. The Tentative Tract Map (“TTM”) for the
development (i.e., TTM 31249) was approved by the La Quinta City Council on September 16,
2003 for 85 single-family homes on 33.3 acres, subject to Conditions of Approval. Environmental
Assessment 2003-475 for TTM 31249 was adopted by the City Council on September 16, 2003
(Resolution 2003-93).
The original developer of the TTM, Adobe Holdings, Inc., recorded the final map and executed on-
site and off-site Subdivision Improvement Agreements (“SIAs”). However, during the economic
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 10
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
downturn, it lost the property through foreclosure after completing some, but not all, of the
improvements. Beazer Homes, the new developer, had acquired interest in the property and desired
to enter into replacement of on-site and off-site SIAs and bonds for the design and construction of
the remaining public and private improvements associated with the tract.
On June 24, 2021, just two days after the Draft EIR was circulated for public review, Beazer
submitted to the City of La Quinta a Retention Basin Rehabilitation and Trail Plan for the
development. On or about June 29, 2021, it requested approval of Site Development Permit 2021-
0005,7 and applied for a Grading Permit on July 22, 2021. On August 16, 2021, it provided the City
with its Plans and Maps for the Fugitive Dust Mitigation Plan. Importantly, MSA Consulting Inc.
(who prepared the EIR for the Wave Festival Project) submitted all the plans to the City on behalf
of Beazer Homes.
On September 29, 2021 the Design and Development Department approved Beazer Homes’ request
for Site Development Permit 2021-0005 for architecture and landscaping plans for the Cantera
Development. Pursuant to the Staff Report, the City found “no changed circumstances or conditions
exist which would require the preparation of any subsequent environmental evaluation.” In other
words, they found that no further CEQA review was necessary, despite the fact that the
environmental assessment was over 19 years old.
According to the Minutes at the October 19, 2021 City Council meeting, La Quinta resident Judy
Hovjacky spoke about the close proximity of the new residential development underway to the
proposed Wave Festival Project. She also noted that MSA Consulting, Inc. is a consultant for both
projects, and that the Draft EIR for the Wave Festival Project must be redone as this proposed
project and zone change was going to significantly impact the residents of the Cantera
Development. It does not appear from the Minutes that the City Council responded to Ms.
Hovjacky’s comments.
On or about February 15, 2022, the City Council approved on-site and off-site replacement SIAs for
TTM 31249. This was all done during the environmental review process for the Wave Festival
Project.
An EIR must discuss a cumulative impact if the project's incremental effect combined with the
effects of other projects is "cumulatively considerable." (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15130(a).) This
determination is based on an assessment of the project's incremental effects "viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable
future projects." (14 Cal Code Regs. § 15065(a)(3) (emphasis added); Banning Ranch Conservancy
v. City of Newport Beach (2012) 211 Cal.App4th 1209, 1228; see also 14 Cal. Code Regs. §
15355(b).)
7 Beazer Homes proposed new architecture and landscape design for the single family homes, all to be constructed on
the existing tract.
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 11
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
The purpose of the cumulative impacts analysis is to avoid considering projects in a vacuum,
because failure to consider cumulative harm may risk environmental disaster. (Whitman v. Board of
Supervisors (1979) 88 Cal.App.3d 397, 408 (citing Natural Resources Defense Council v. Callaway
(2d Cir. 1975) 524 F.2d 79). Without this analysis, piecemeal approval of several projects with
related impacts could lead to severe environmental harm. (Golden Door Props., LLC v. County of
San Diego (2020) 50 Cal.App.5th 467, 527; San Joaquin Raptor/Wildlife Rescue Ctr. v. County of
Stanislaus (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 713, 720; Las Virgenes Homeowners Fed'n v. County of Los
Angeles (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 300, 306.) An adequate analysis of cumulative impacts is
particularly important when another related project might significantly worsen the project's adverse
environmental impacts. (Friends of the Eel River v. Sonoma County Water Agency (2003) 108
Cal.App.4th 859.)
The CEQA Guidelines set forth two methods for satisfying the cumulative impacts analysis
requirement: the list-of-projects approach and the summary-of-projections approach. Under either
method, the EIR must summarize the expected environmental effects of the project and related
projects, provide a reasonable analysis of cumulative impacts, and examine reasonable options for
mitigating or avoiding the project's contribution to any significant cumulative impacts. (14 Cal.
Code Regs. §§ 15130(b)(1)(A)–(B), 15130(b)(4)–(5).) It should also provide a specific reference to
additional information stating where it is available. (14 Cal. Code Regs. §15130(b)(4).)
It appears that the EIR attempted to use the summary-of-projections approach by relying on the
City’s General Plan Amendment (“GPA”). (Draft EIR, Section 4.1-71-4.1-73.) However, the only
reference to the Cantera Development in the GPA is in Table II-39 of the Housing section. (GPA,
Housing, at II-231.) The table discussing a sample of new market rate housing prices, and lists “La
Cantera” as a single-family residence (3-4 bedrooms) with a sales price of approximately $700,000.
(Id.) No square footage was listed for the homes, or even the number of homes being built. (Id.)
It is not surprising that the GPA had very little information about the project, or its cumulative
effects on the surrounding area. This information is outdated, since the Project had been stagnant
from 2003 to 2021. The Cantera Development is over 19 years old. The environment surrounding
the project site has changed dramatically since 2003, including traffic, air quality, and noise.
Nevertheless, despite the age of the environmental analysis, the City Council failed to require the
new developer to update its Environmental Assessment.
Even worse, it does not appear that the Wave Festival Project took into account the Cantera
Development AT ALL in its meager 3-page cumulative impact analysis. Despite the close
proximity to the development, the EIR failed to analyze this new development’s cumulative impacts
on the Wave Festival Project. How can an 85 single-family home community immediately adjacent
to the Wave Festival Project not be discussed?
When determining whether a cumulative impact must be analyzed, there are two related
determinations to make:
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 12
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
(1) Is the combined impact of the project and other projects significant? (14 Cal. Code Regs.
§ 15130(a)(2).)
(2) Is the project's incremental effect cumulatively considerable? (14 Cal. Code Regs. §
15130(a).)
LQRRD is concerned about the potential cumulative impacts associated with this new development,
including its off-site construction related congestion, changes to the traffic patterns, and site access,
increased air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and water usage. Since the EIR fails to
account for impacts from this new development, the Wave Festival Project’s incremental increase in
criteria to environmental impacts within the area are mispresented.
Traffic, water demands, greenhouse gas emissions, noise and air pollution are aggregate and have
cumulative effects. It would be disastrous oversight for the City to allow the Wave Festival Project
to move forward without fully analyzing this Project impact in relation to the overall impact of the
Cantera Development that is currently in development.
III. The Wave Festival Project Will Be Unable to Meet The Requirements of the New
Executive Order
Gov. Newson signed an Executive Order N-7-22 (“Order”) in response to intensifying drought
conditions. The Order, signed on March 28, 2022, builds on his four 2021 orders relating to
California’s drought, which is now in its third year. Among other requirements, the Order limits a
county, city or other public agency’s ability to permit modified or new groundwater wells, and
instructs the State Water Resource Control Board (“Water Board”) to consider (1) requiring certain
water conservation measures from urban water suppliers and (2) banning non-functional or
decorative grass at businesses and institutions. The Order notes that groundwater use accounts for
41 percent of the State's total water supply on an average annual basis but as much as 58 percent in
a critically dry year, and approximately 85 percent of public water systems rely on groundwater as
their primary supply.
Immediate Requirements:
Before local entities can permit new or modified groundwater wells in high and medium priority
groundwater basins, the Order requires the Groundwater Sustainability Agency monitoring the
basin to verify in writing that the permitted action is not inconsistent with the Groundwater
Sustainability Plan or other groundwater management program for the basin. Additionally, the
permitting entity must determine that the well will not interfere with nearby wells and will not cause
subsidence that could negatively affect nearby infrastructure.
In 2014, the California Legislature signed a three-bill legislative package into law, collectively
known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (“SGMA”). (Draft EIR, at 4.9-10.) SGMA
allows local agencies to manage groundwater resources in a sustainable manner, with management
efforts tailored to the resources and needs of their specific communities. (Id.) Groundwater
management is described as the planned and coordinated monitoring, operation, and administration
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 13
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
of a groundwater basin’s sustainability. (Id.) SGMA requires that a Groundwater Sustainability Plan
(“GSP”) or Alternative Plan to a GSP (“Alternative Plan”) be adopted for basins and subbasins
designated by the DWR as medium-and high-priority basins. SGMA requires that a Groundwater
Sustainability Agency (“GSA”) be established to manage the basin and develop the plan. The GSP
or Alternative Plan must explain how the groundwater basin will be kept in balance to achieve long
term sustainability. (Id.) DWR evaluates each GSP or Alternative Plan in how well it will achieve
basin sustainability. (Id.)
The Indio Subbasin was designated as a medium-priority subbasin by DWR. (Id.) CVWD,
Coachella Water Authority (“CWA”), Desert Water Agency (“DWA”), and Indio Water Authority
(“IWA”) collectively represent the Indio Subbasin GSAs.
Water and sewer service for the Specific Plan area is provided by the CVWD. The CVWD provides
domestic water from wells. Pursuant to an existing agreement with CVWD, the Project will develop
two onsite wells sites, one of which will be equipped with a well pumping plant as required by
CVWD to serve the project. The project will also drill a private well to provide an additional source
of water for non-domestic (outdoor) purposes. (Draft EIR, at 3-29.) The exact location of the wells
and well sites will be subject to CVWD approval.
The Wave Festival Project’s Specific Plan must “conform to the requirements of the CVWD's
current and future programs and requirements pertaining to water management and conservation.”
(Specific Plan, p. 40.). Since permits have not yet been issued for the two onsite wells sites and
private well described in the Specific Plan, the new regulations will be applicable to the Project.
Pursuant to the Order, the City of La Quinta cannot approve a permit for a new groundwater well or
for alteration of an existing well in a basin subject to the SGMA and classified as medium-or-high-
priority without first obtaining written verification from a GSA managing the basin or area of the
basin where the well is proposed to be located that groundwater extraction by the proposed well
would not be inconsistent with any sustainable groundwater management program established in
any applicable GSP adopted by that GSA and would not decrease the likelihood of achieving a
sustainability goal for the basin covered by such a plan. As set forth above, the Indio Subbasin is
designated as a medium-priority subbasin, and it is managed collectively by CVWD, CWA, DWA,
and IWA. Therefore, based on the new regulations, the City of La Quinta must receive a written
verification from the GSAs that groundwater extraction by the proposed well would not be
inconsistent with any sustainable groundwater management program.
In addition, the Order states that the public agency cannot issue a permit for a new groundwater
well or for alteration of an existing well without first determining that extraction of groundwater
from the proposed well is (1) not likely to interfere with the production and functioning of existing
nearby wells, and (2) not likely to cause subsidence that would adversely impact or damage nearby
infrastructure. Since these permits have not yet been issued, the Project will be subject to these new
requirements. The Project will also be subject to possible inspections by the Water Board, since it is
now required to “expand inspections to determine whether illegal diversions or wasteful or
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 14
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
unreasonable use of water are occurring and bring enforcement actions against illegal diverters and
those engaging in the wasteful and unreasonable use of water.”
Potential New Water Board Regulations:
By May 25, 2022, the Water Board must consider adopting regulations requiring the following:
• Urban water suppliers shall submit a draft annual water supply and demand
assessment, as required in Water Code section 10632.1, by June 1, 2022. The final
draft remains due on July 1, 2022.
• Urban water suppliers shall activate their Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP)
Level 2 requirements (anticipating up to a 20% reduction in supplies), or an
equivalent standard if there is no adopted WSCP, by a date to be determined by the
Water Board. CEQA requirements for projects relating to implementing WSCP
Level 2 requirements are suspended.
• The Water Board shall consider defining non-functional turf and banning the
irrigation of non-functional turf for commercial, industrial and institutional
properties.
The Order also encourages urban water suppliers to conserve more than required by the emergency
regulations if the drought lasts beyond this year and to voluntarily activate more stringent local
requirements based on a shortage level of up to thirty percent (Level 3). Therefore, to the extent the
Water Board adopts new regulations, those will also be applicable to the Project.
In a clear sign that the drought persists, the Order is aimed at stopping residents from wasting the
state’s precious water. The City of La Quinta should also focus on prioritizing this resource. A surf
park in the middle of the desert encompasses the very definition of wastefulness. If the Wave
Festival Project fails to meet the new permitting requirements, and/or the new investigative
standards for reasonable use of water, the citizens of La Quinta will be left with a failed Project.
This is not good for either the Project or the City.
IV. CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, we respectfully request that the City refrain from acting on the Wave
Festival Project until it has prepared and recirculated an EIR that fully complies with CEQA. A
revised EIR is required to analyze and mitigate the proposed Project’s significant impacts.
Sincerely,
Bruce T. Bauer, Esq.
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
April 12, 2022
Page 15
SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
cc: Jon McMillen (jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov)
Cheri Flores (clflores@laquintaca.gov)
Nicole Sauviat Criste (ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov)
1
Tania Flores
From:Maria Sarmiento <maria@mitchtsailaw.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 1:39 PM
To:Tania Flores; Consulting Planner
Cc:Mitchell Tsai; Mary Linares; Hind Baki; Brandon Young; Rebekah Youngblood; Malou Reyes; Steven
Thong
Subject:SWRCC - [City of La Quinta, Coral Mountain Resort] - Comment Letter
Attachments:20220412_CoralMountainResort_CmmtLtr_PC_Signed_Complete.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
Good Afternoon,
Attached please find our comment letter regarding the above mentioned project in the City of La Quinta.
Please confirm receipt of this email.
Thank you.
Maria Sarmiento
Paralegal
Mitchell M. Tsai, Attorney At Law
139 South Hudson Avenue Suite 200
Pasadena, CA 91101
Phone: (626) 314-3821
Fax: (626) 389-5414
Email: maria@mitchtsailaw.com
Website: http://www.mitchtsailaw.com
*** Our Office Has Recently Moved. Please Note New Mailing Address ****
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages
accompanying it, may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a
person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution
or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED and may violate
applicable laws including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify us by reply e-mail at maria@mitchtsailaw.com or by telephone at (626) 381-9248 and destroy the original
transmission and its attachments without reading them or saving them to disk. Thank you.
P: (626) 381-9248
F: (626) 389-5414
E: info@mitchtsailaw.com
Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorney At Law
139 South Hudson Avenue
Suite 200
Pasadena, California 91101
VIA E-MAIL
April 12, 2022
Tania Flores, Planning Commission Secretary,
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Em: tflores@laquintaca.gov
Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Em: consultingplanner@laquintaca.gov
RE: April 12, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting, Agenda Public Hearing
No. 1; Regarding the Coral Mountain Resort Final Environmental
Impact Report (SCH #2021020310)
Dear Tania Flores and Nicole Sauviat Criste,
On behalf of the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (“Southwest
Carpenters”), my Office is submitting these comments on the City of La Quinta’s
(“City” or “Lead Agency”) April 12, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting, Agenda
Public Hearing No. 1 regarding the Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”)
(SCH No. 2021020310) for the proposed Coral Mountain Resort Project (“Project”).
This letter reiterates and supplements comments submitted by Southwest Carpenters
on August 5, 2021 and March 22, 2022 re. Environmental Impact Report Comments;
hereby attached and incorporated by reference as (Exhibit D) and (Exhibit E),
respectively.
The City proposes to adopt the Project, carving out 386 acres of a 929-acre area of
the City, to promote future development of the Coral Mountain Resort. The Project
would allow for the development of 600 residential units, a 150-room resort hotel
plus complementary uses and amenities, a recreational surf facility, 57,000 square feet
of commercial development, 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses,
and 23.6 acres of recreational uses. As part of the Project, the City would initiate a
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 2 of 14
general plan amendment and zoning change to designate the Project area for “Tourist
Commercial” uses; a specific plan amendment to exclude the Project area from a
previous specific plan; the adoption of the Project’s specific plan; the adoption of a
tentative tract map; site development permits; and the adoption of a development
agreement with the Project applicant.
Southwest Carpenters is a labor union representing more than 50,000 union
carpenters in six states and has a strong interest in well-ordered land use planning and
addressing the environmental impacts of development projects.
Individual members of the Southwest Carpenters live, work, and recreate in the City
and surrounding communities and would be directly affected by the Project’s
environmental impacts.
Southwest Carpenters expressly reserve the right to supplement these comments at or
prior to hearings on the Project, and at any later hearings and proceedings related to
this Project. Cal. Gov. Code § 65009(b); Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21177(a); Bakersfield
Citizens for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 1184, 1199-1203; see
Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Water Dist. (1997) 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121.
Southwest Carpenters incorporate by reference all comments raising issues regarding
the EIR submitted prior to certification of the EIR for the Project. Citizens for Clean
Energy v City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal. App. 4th 173, 191 (finding that any party who
has objected to the Project’s environmental documentation may assert any issue
timely raised by other parties).
Moreover, Southwest Carpenters request that the Lead Agency provide notice for any
and all notices referring or related to the Project issued under the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Cal Public Resources Code (“PRC”) § 21000
et seq, and the California Planning and Zoning Law (“Planning and Zoning Law”),
Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 65000–65010. California Public Resources Code Sections 21092.2,
and 21167(f) and Government Code Section 65092 require agencies to mail such
notices to any person who has filed a written request for them with the clerk of the
agency’s governing body.
The City should require the Applicant provide additional community benefits such as
requiring local hire and use of a skilled and trained workforce to build the Project.
The City should require the use of workers who have graduated from a Joint Labor
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 3 of 14
Management apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California, or
have at least as many hours of on-the-job experience in the applicable craft which
would be required to graduate from such a state approved apprenticeship training
program or who are registered apprentices in an apprenticeship training program
approved by the State of California.
Community benefits such as local hire and skilled and trained workforce requirements
can also be helpful to reduce environmental impacts and improve the positive
economic impact of the Project. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain
percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the
length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized
economic benefits. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of
workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of
vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic
benefits. As environmental consultants Matt Hagemann and Paul E. Rosenfeld note:
[A]ny local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length
from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of
construction-related GHG emissions, though the significance of the
reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the
project site.
March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and
Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling.
Skilled and trained workforce requirements promote the development of skilled trades
that yield sustainable economic development. As the California Workforce
Development Board and the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
concluded:
. . . labor should be considered an investment rather than a cost – and
investments in growing, diversifying, and upskilling California’s workforce
can positively affect returns on climate mitigation efforts. In other words,
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 4 of 14
well trained workers are key to delivering emissions reductions and
moving California closer to its climate targets.1
On May 7, 2021, the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that that the
“[u]se of a local state-certified apprenticeship program or a skilled and trained
workforce with a local hire component” can result in air pollutant reductions.2
Cities are increasingly adopting local skilled and trained workforce policies and
requirements into general plans and municipal codes. For example, the City of
Hayward 2040 General Plan requires the City to “promote local hiring . . . to help
achieve a more positive jobs-housing balance, and reduce regional commuting, gas
consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions.”3
In fact, the City of Hayward has gone as far as to adopt a Skilled Labor Force policy
into its Downtown Specific Plan and municipal code, requiring developments in its
Downtown area to requiring that the City “[c]ontribute to the stabilization of regional
construction markets by spurring applicants of housing and nonresidential
developments to require contractors to utilize apprentices from state-approved, joint
labor-management training programs, . . .”4 In addition, the City of Hayward requires
all projects 30,000 square feet or larger to “utilize apprentices from state-approved,
joint labor-management training programs.”5
Locating jobs closer to residential areas can have significant environmental benefits.
As the California Planning Roundtable noted in 2008:
1 California Workforce Development Board (2020) Putting California on the High Road: A Jobs and
Climate Action Plan for 2030 at p. ii, available at https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2020/09/Putting-California-on-the-High-Road.pdf.
2 South Coast Air Quality Management District (May 7, 2021) Certify Final Environmental
Assessment and Adopt Proposed Rule 2305 – Warehouse Indirect Source Rule – Warehouse
Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions Program, and Proposed Rule 316 – Fees for Rule
2305, Submit Rule 2305 for Inclusion Into the SIP, and Approve Supporting Budget Actions,
available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/Governing-Board/2021/2021-
May7-027.pdf?sfvrsn=10.
3 City of Hayward (2014) Hayward 2040 General Plan Policy Document at p. 3-99, available at
https://www.hayward-ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/General Plan FINAL.pdf.
4 City of Hayward (2019) Hayward Downtown Specific Plan at p. 5-24, available at https://www.
hayward-ca.gov/sites/default/files/Hayward%20Downtown%20Specific%20Plan.pdf.
5 City of Hayward Municipal Code, Chapter 10, § 28.5.3.020(C).
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 5 of 14
People who live and work in the same jurisdiction would be more likely
to take transit, walk, or bicycle to work than residents of less balanced
communities and their vehicle trips would be shorter. Benefits would
include potential reductions in both vehicle miles traveled and vehicle
hours traveled.6
In addition, local hire mandates as well as skill training are critical facets of a strategy
to reduce vehicle miles traveled. As planning experts Robert Cervero and Michael
Duncan noted, simply placing jobs near housing stock is insufficient to achieve VMT
reductions since the skill requirements of available local jobs must be matched to
those held by local residents.7 Some municipalities have tied local hire and skilled and
trained workforce policies to local development permits to address transportation
issues. As Cervero and Duncan note:
In nearly built-out Berkeley, CA, the approach to balancing jobs and
housing is to create local jobs rather than to develop new housing.” The
city’s First Source program encourages businesses to hire local residents,
especially for entry- and intermediate-level jobs, and sponsors vocational
training to ensure residents are employment-ready. While the program is
voluntary, some 300 businesses have used it to date, placing more than
3,000 city residents in local jobs since it was launched in 1986. When
needed, these carrots are matched by sticks, since the city is not shy about
negotiating corporate participation in First Source as a condition of
approval for development permits.
The City should consider utilizing skilled and trained workforce policies and
requirements to benefit the local area economically and mitigate greenhouse gas, air
quality and transportation impacts.
The City should also require the Project to be built to standards exceeding the current
2019 California Green Building Code to mitigate the Project’s environmental impacts
and to advance progress towards the State of California’s environmental goals.
6 California Planning Roundtable (2008) Deconstructing Jobs-Housing Balance at p. 6, available at
https://cproundtable.org/static/media/uploads/publications/cpr-jobs-housing.pdf.
7 Cervero, Robert and Duncan, Michael (2006) Which Reduces Vehicle Travel More: Jobs-Housing
Balance or Retail-Housing Mixing? Journal of the American Planning Association 72 (4), 475-490,
482, available at http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/UTCT-825.pdf.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 6 of 14
I. THE PROJECT WOULD BE APPROVED IN VIOLATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
A. Background Concerning the California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA has two basic purposes. First, CEQA is designed to inform decision makers
and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project. 14
California Code of Regulations (“CCR” or “CEQA Guidelines”) § 15002(a)(1).8 “Its
purpose is to inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental
consequences of their decisions before they are made. Thus, the EIR ‘protects not only
the environment but also informed self-government.’ [Citation.]” Citizens of Goleta
Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 553, 564. The EIR has been described as
“an environmental ‘alarm bell’ whose purpose it is to alert the public and its
responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached ecological
points of no return.” Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay v. Bd. of Port Comm’rs. (2001) 91 Cal.
App. 4th 1344, 1354 (“Berkeley Jets”); County of Inyo v. Yorty (1973) 32 Cal. App. 3d 795,
810.
Second, CEQA directs public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage
when possible by requiring alternatives or mitigation measures. CEQA Guidelines §
15002(a)(2) and (3). See also, Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal. App. 4th 1344, 1354; Citizens of Goleta
Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553; Laurel Heights Improvement Ass’n v.
Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 400. The EIR serves to
provide public agencies and the public in general with information about the effect
that a proposed project is likely to have on the environment and to “identify ways that
environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced.” CEQA Guidelines §
15002(a)(2). If the project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may
approve the project only upon finding that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened
all significant effects on the environment where feasible” and that any unavoidable
significant effects on the environment are “acceptable due to overriding concerns”
specified in CEQA section 21081. CEQA Guidelines § 15092(b)(2)(A–B).
8 The CEQA Guidelines, codified in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, section 150000
et seq, are regulatory guidelines promulgated by the state Natural Resources Agency for the
implementation of CEQA. (Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.) The CEQA Guidelines are given “great
weight in interpreting CEQA except when . . . clearly unauthorized or erroneous.” Center for
Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal. 4th 204, 217.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 7 of 14
While the courts review an EIR using an “abuse of discretion” standard, “the
reviewing court is not to ‘uncritically rely on every study or analysis presented by a
project proponent in support of its position.’ A ‘clearly inadequate or unsupported
study is entitled to no judicial deference.’” Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1355
(emphasis added) (quoting Laurel Heights, 47 Cal.3d at 391, 409 fn. 12). Drawing this
line and determining whether the EIR complies with CEQA’s information disclosure
requirements presents a question of law subject to independent review by the courts.
Sierra Club v. Cnty. of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal. 5th 502, 515; Madera Oversight Coalition, Inc. v.
County of Madera (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 48, 102, 131. As the court stated in Berkeley
Jets, 91 Cal. App. 4th at 1355:
A prejudicial abuse of discretion occurs “if the failure to include relevant
information precludes informed decision-making and informed public
participation, thereby thwarting the statutory goals of the EIR process.
The preparation and circulation of an EIR is more than a set of technical hurdles for
agencies and developers to overcome. The EIR’s function is to ensure that
government officials who decide to build or approve a project do so with a full
understanding of the environmental consequences and, equally important, that the
public is assured those consequences have been considered. For the EIR to serve
these goals it must present information so that the foreseeable impacts of pursuing
the project can be understood and weighed, and the public must be given an adequate
opportunity to comment on that presentation before the decision to go forward is
made. Communities for a Better Environment v. Richmond (2010) 184 Cal. App. 4th 70, 80
(quoting Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007)
40 Cal.4th 412, 449–450).
II. EXPERTS
This comment letter includes comments from air quality and greenhouse gas experts
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg. and Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. concerning the FEIR. Their
comments, attachments, and Curriculum Vitae (“CV”) are hereby attached and
incorporated by reference as (Exhibit F).
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg. (“Mr. Hagemann”) has over 30 years of experience in
environmental policy, contaminant assessment and remediation, stormwater
compliance, and CEQA review. He spent nine years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA
and Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science Policy Advisor in the
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 8 of 14
Western Regional Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from
perchlorate and MTBE. While with EPA, Mr. Hagemann also served as Senior
Hydrogeologist in the oversight of the assessment of seven major military facilities
undergoing base closer. He led numerous enforcement actions under provisions of
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and directed efforts to improve
hydrogeologic characterization and water quality monitoring.
For the past 15 years, Mr. Hagemann has worked as a founding partner with SWAPE
(Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise). At SWAPE, Mr. Hagemann has developed
extensive client relationships and has managed complex projects that include
consultation as an expert witness and a regulatory specialist, and a manager of projects
ranging from industrial stormwater compliance to CEQA review of impacts from
hazardous waste, air quality, and greenhouse gas emissions.
Mr. Hagemann has a Bachelor of Arts degree in geology from Humboldt State
University in California and a Masters in Science degree from California State
University Los Angeles in California.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (“Dr. Rosenfeld”) is a principal environmental chemist at
SWAPE. Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years’ experience conducting environmental
investigations and risk assessments for evaluating impacts on human health, property,
and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and transport of
environmental contaminants, human health risks, exposure assessment, and ecological
restoration. Dr. Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from
unconventional oil drilling operations, oil spills, landfills, boilers and incinerators,
process stacks, storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, and many other
industrial and agricultural sources. His project experience ranges from monitoring
and modeling of pollution sources to evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at
industrial facilities and residents in surrounding communities.
Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk
assessments for contaminated sites containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria,
particular matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents, pesticides,
radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs,
PAHs, perchlorate, asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS),
unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates (MTBE), among other pollutants, Dr. Rosenfeld
also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from various projects and is
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 9 of 14
an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as
the evaluation of odor nuisance impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous
emissions. As a principal scientist at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld directs air dispersion
modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert witness and testified
about pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at dozens of sites and
has testified as an expert witness on more than ten cases involving exposure to air
contaminants from industrial sources.
Dr. Rosenfeld has a Ph.D. in soil chemistry from the University of Washington, M.S.
in environmental science from U.C. Berkeley, and B.A. in environmental studies from
U.C. Santa Barbara.
III. THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS
DEFICIENT
A. The FEIR Fails to Properly Evaluate and Mitigate the Project’s Air
Quality Impacts
1. The DEIR Improperly Labels Mitigation Measures as “Project Design
Features”
The DEIR improperly labels mitigation measures for “Project Design Features” or
“PDFs” which the DEIR purports will “reduce the associated impacts to less than
significant levels” DEIR p. 4.1-23. See also, DEIR pp. 4.1-29, 4.1-31. Tables 4.2-6, 4.2-
8, 4.2-10.
For example, the DEIR states that “[a]fter implementation of PDFs and MM-AQ-3,
project operational-source emissions will be reduced to less than significant levels.”
DEIR p. 4.1-29. And that, “[a]fter implementation of PDFs and MM AQ-3, special
event operational-source emissions will not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds
of significance for emissions of any criteria pollutant.” DEIR 4.1-29. Further, the
DEIR states that:
“The VOC emissions generated would therefore exceed SCAQMD
thresholds, and result in significant impacts requiring mitigation.
Through the implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) AQ-1, the
overlap of these activities will be prevented, such that it will avoid
simultaneous emissions of these pollutants attributed to these activities
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 10 of 14
and therefore will maintain the peak emissions under the established
thresholds and reduce the associated impacts to less than significant
levels.”
DEIR pp. 4.1-23
Relying on the PDFs, the DEIR concludes in many instances that the Project’s
impacts are less than significant and that no mitigation is required.
However, it is established that “’[a]voidance, minimization and / or mitigation
measure’ . . . are not ‘part of the project.’ . . . compressing the analysis of impacts and
mitigation measures into a single issue . . disregards the requirements of CEQA.”
(Lotus v. Department of Transportation (2014) 223 Cal. App. 4th 645, 656.)
When “an agency decides to incorporate mitigation measures into its significance
determination, and relies on those mitigation measures to determine that no
significant effects will occur, that agency must treat those measures as though there
were adopted following a finding of significance.” (Lotus, supra, 223 Cal. App. 4th at
652 [citing CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1) and Cal. Public Resources Code §
21081(a)(1).])
By labeling mitigation measures as project design features, the City violates CEQA by
failing to disclose “the analytic route that the agency took from the evidence to its
findings.” (Cal. Public Resources Code § 21081.5; CEQA Guidelines § 15093; Village
Laguna of Laguna Beach, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1982) 134 Cal. App. 3d 1022, 1035
[quoting Topanga Assn for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal. 3d
506, 515.])
The DEIR’s use of “Project Design Features” further violates CEQA because such
measures would not be included in the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program CEQA requires lead agencies to adopt mitigation measures that are fully
enforceable and to adopt a monitoring and/or reporting program to ensure that the
measures are implemented to reduce the Project’s significant environmental effects to
the extent feasible. (PRC § 21081.6; CEQA Guidelines § 15091(d).)
Therefore, the Project’s air quality analysis is inadequate, as the DEIR and FEIR
should have incorporated all PDFs, as described in the DEIR, as formal mitigation
measures. DEIR pp. 4.1-13 – 4.1-15.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 11 of 14
2. The Project’s Total Operational Air Quality Impacts May Be Grossly
Underestimated
The DEIR improperly calculates the Project’s operational emissions because it fails to
sum the emissions for Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3 in order to estimate the Project’s
total operational air quality impact.
As experts Matt Hagemann and Paul Rosenfeld state, “[i]n order to correctly evaluate
the Project’s air quality impact, we summed the DEIR’s operational air quality
emissions from all three phases of Project buildout. We found that the Project’s
operational VOC and NOX emissions exceed the applicable SCAQMD threshold of
55 pounds per day (“lbs/day”)” Exhibit F, p. 2.
B. The FEIR Fails to Properly Evaluate and Mitigate the Project’s Health
Risk Impacts
The Project violates CEQA because the EIR does not include a quantified health risk
assessment which correlates the Project’s construction and operational toxic air
contaminant (“TAC”) emissions and air pollutants to its impact on human health as
set forth on Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal. 5th 502.
As experts Matt Hagemann and Paul Rosenfeld explain, “construction of the
proposed Project would produce diesel particulate matter (“DPM”) emissions through
the exhaust stacks of construction equipment over a potential construction period of
approximately 4- to 6-years ([DEIR] p. 82). Furthermore, the DEIR indicates that the
Project would generate approximately 8,932 daily vehicle trips, which would generate
additional exhaust emissions and continue to expose nearby sensitive receptors to
DPM emissions during Project operation ([DEIR] p. 4.13-43).” Exhibit F, p. 4.
Therefore, the EIR should be revised to include an analysis of health risk impacts
posed to nearby sensitive receptors from Project-generated DPM emissions for future
individual projects.
C. The Project Fails to Properly Evaluate and Mitigate the Project’s
Greenhouse Gas Impacts Because the EIR Fails to Describe All Feasible
Mitigation Measures That Can Minimize the Project’s Significant Impacts
Associated with GHG Emissions
A fundamental purpose of an EIR is to identify ways in which a proposed project's
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 12 of 14
significant environmental impacts can be mitigated or avoided. Pub. Res. Code §§
21002.1(a), 21061. To implement this statutory purpose, an EIR must describe any
feasible mitigation measures that can minimize the project's significant environmental
effects. PRC §§ 21002.1(a), 21100(b)(3); CEQA Guidelines §§ 15121(a), 15126.4(a).
If the project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the
project only upon finding that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened all
significant effects on the environment where feasible” PRC §§ 21002; 21002.1, 21081;
CEQA Guidelines §§ 15091, 15092(b)(2)(A); and find that ‘specific overriding
economic, legal, social, technology or other benefits of the project outweigh the
significant effects on the environment.” PRC §§ 21002; 21002.1, 21081; CEQA
Guidelines §§ 15091, 15092(b)(2)(B). “A gloomy forecast of environmental
degradation is of little or no value without pragmatic, concrete means to minimize the
impacts and restore ecological equilibrium.” Environmental Council of Sacramento v. City of
Sacramento (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1018, 1039.
According to CEQA Guidelines, “[w]hen an EIR has been prepared for a project, the
Responsible Agency shall not approve the project as proposed if the agency finds any
feasible alternative or feasible mitigation measures within its powers that would
substantially lessen or avoid any significant effect the project would have on the
environment.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15096(g)(2).
The DEIR concludes that the Project will have significant Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
emissions impacts, since “Project implementation would produce GHG emissions
totaling 6.46 MTCO2e per SP per year, which would exceed the SCAQMD screening
threshold of 3.65 MTCO2e per SP per year” DEIR, p. 4.7-19.
The Project proposes to follow certain regulatory requirements and proposes PDF’s
and GHG mitigation measure MMGHG-1 to further reduce construction and
operational emissions. DEIR, 4.7-20; Concluding that the Project’s impacts associated
with GHG emissions are “significant and unavoidable” DEIR, p. 4.7-20.
However, an impact can only be labeled as significant-and-unavoidable after all
available, feasible mitigation is considered and the EIR lacks substantial evidence to
support a finding that no other feasible mitigation existed to mitigate Project’s
significant impacts.
The EIR fails to demonstrate consistency with all the measures and strategies of the
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 13 of 14
2020 SCAG RTP/SCS Plan. Thus, the EIR fails to demonstrate that all feasible
mitigation measures were considered. To the extent that the Project fails to comply
with the measures mentioned above, the Project EIR has failed to mitigate GHG
emissions to the extent feasible.
Experts Paul Rosenfeld and Matt Hagemann identify several mitigation measures that
are applicable to the proposed Project. Therefore, to reduce the Project’s emissions,
including SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS PEIR’s Air Quality Project Level Mitigation
Measures (“PMM-AQ-1”) and Greenhouse Gas Project Level Mitigation Measures
(“PMM-GHG-1”).9 Exhibit F, p. 5.
Furthermore, the EIR fails to integrate or consider many GHG reduction measures
outlined in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA)
August 2010 Report which the South Coast Air Quality Management District has
recognized as a “comprehensive guidance document for quantifying the effectiveness
of GHG mitigation measures.”10
IV. CONCLUSION
Southwest Carpenters request that the City revise and recirculate the Project’s FEIR
to address the aforementioned concerns. If the City has any questions or concerns,
feel free to contact my Office.
Sincerely,
9 “4.0 Mitigation Measures.” Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report Addendum #1,
September 2020, available at https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/fpeir
connectsocal addendum 4 mitigationmeasures.pdf?1606004420, p. 4.0-2 – 4.0-10; 4.0-19 – 4.0-
23; See also: “Certified Final Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report.” Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG), May 2020, available at
https://scag.ca.gov/peir.
10 South Coast Air Quality Management District (2019) “Greenhouse Gases, accessed on April 10,
2022, available at https://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-
handbook/mitigation-measures-and-control-efficiencies/greenhouse-gases. See also “Quantifying
Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission
Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures” California Air Pollution Control
Officers Association (CAPCOA) August 2010, available at https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/
default-source/ceqa/handbook/mitigation-measures-and-control-efficiencies/quantifying-
greenhouse-gas-mitigation-measures.pdf?sfvrsn=0
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
April 12, 2022
Page 14 of 14
______________________
Mary Linares, Esq.
Attorney for Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
Attached:
March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and
Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling (Exhibit A);
Air Quality and GHG Expert Paul Rosenfeld CV (Exhibit B);
Air Quality and GHG Expert Matt Hagemann CV (Exhibit C);
August 5, 2021 Letter from Mitchell M. Tsai re. Comments Regarding the Coral
Mountain Resort Draft Environmental Impact Report (Exhibit D);
March 12, 2022 Letter from Mitchell M. Tsai re. Comments Regarding the Coral
Mountain Resort Final Environmental Impact Report (Exhibit E);
April 6, 2022 Letter from Hagemann and Rosenfeld to Mitchel M. Tsai re Comments
on the Environmental Impact Reports for the Coral Mountain Resort Project, with
Exhibits (Exhibit F).
EXHIBIT A
1
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
mhagemann@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
prosenfeld@swape.com
March 8, 2021
Mitchell M. Tsai
155 South El Molino, Suite 104
Pasadena, CA 91101
Subject: Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling
Dear Mr. Tsai,
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (“SWAPE”) is pleased to provide the following draft technical report
explaining the significance of worker trips required for construction of land use development projects with
respect to the estimation of greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions. The report will also discuss the potential for
local hire requirements to reduce the length of worker trips, and consequently, reduced or mitigate the
potential GHG impacts.
Worker Trips and Greenhouse Gas Calculations
The California Emissions Estimator Model (“CalEEMod”) is a “statewide land use emissions computer model
designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental
professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with both
construction and operations from a variety of land use projects.”1 CalEEMod quantifies construction-related
emissions associated with land use projects resulting from off-road construction equipment; on-road mobile
equipment associated with workers, vendors, and hauling; fugitive dust associated with grading, demolition,
truck loading, and on-road vehicles traveling along paved and unpaved roads; and architectural coating
activities; and paving.2
The number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to calculate emissions associated
with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the Project site during construction.3
1 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home.
2 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home.
3 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/01 user-39-s-guide2016-3-2 15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34.
2
Specifically, the number and length of vehicle trips is utilized to estimate the vehicle miles travelled (“VMT”)
associated with construction. Then, utilizing vehicle-class specific EMFAC 2014 emission factors, CalEEMod
calculates the vehicle exhaust, evaporative, and dust emissions resulting from construction-related VMT,
including personal vehicles for worker commuting.4
Specifically, in order to calculate VMT, CalEEMod multiplies the average daily trip rate by the average overall trip
length (see excerpt below):
“VMTd = Σ(Average Daily Trip Rate i * Average Overall Trip Length i) n
Where:
n = Number of land uses being modeled.”5
Furthermore, to calculate the on-road emissions associated with worker trips, CalEEMod utilizes the following
equation (see excerpt below):
“Emissionspollutant = VMT * EFrunning,pollutant
Where:
Emissionspollutant = emissions from vehicle running for each pollutant
VMT = vehicle miles traveled
EFrunning,pollutant = emission factor for running emissions.”6
Thus, there is a direct relationship between trip length and VMT, as well as a direct relationship between VMT
and vehicle running emissions. In other words, when the trip length is increased, the VMT and vehicle running
emissions increase as a result. Thus, vehicle running emissions can be reduced by decreasing the average overall
trip length, by way of a local hire requirement or otherwise.
Default Worker Trip Parameters and Potential Local Hire Requirements
As previously discussed, the number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to
calculate emissions associated with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the
Project site during construction.7 In order to understand how local hire requirements and associated worker trip
length reductions impact GHG emissions calculations, it is important to consider the CalEEMod default worker
trip parameters. CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site-specific information, such as
land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project
type. If more specific project information is known, the user can change the default values and input project-
specific values, but the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requires that such changes be justified by
substantial evidence.8 The default number of construction-related worker trips is calculated by multiplying the
4 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 14-15.
5 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 23.
6 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 15.
7 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/01 user-39-s-guide2016-3-2 15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34.
8 CalEEMod User Guide, available at: http://www.caleemod.com/, p. 1, 9.
5
Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we
retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional
services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar
circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of
service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and
protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which
were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain
informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of
information obtained or provided by third parties.
Sincerely,
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
Location Type Location Name Rural H-W
(miles)
Urban H-W
(miles)
Air Basin Great Basin 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Lake County 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Lake Tahoe 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Mountain 16.8 10.8
Air Basin North Central 17.1 12.3
Air Basin North Coast 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Northeast 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Sacramento 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Salton Sea 14.6 11
Air Basin San Diego 16.8 10.8
Air Basin San Francisco
10.8 10.8
Air Basin San Joaquin 16.8 10.8
Air Basin South Central 16.8 10.8
Air Basin South Coast 19.8 14.7
Air District Amador County 16.8 10.8
Air District Antelope Valley 16.8 10.8
Air District Bay Area AQMD 10.8 10.8
Air District Butte County 12.54 12.54
Air District Calaveras
16.8 10.8
Air District Colusa County 16.8 10.8
Air District El Dorado
16.8 10.8
Air District Feather River 16.8 10.8
Air District Glenn County 16.8 10.8
Air District Great Basin 16.8 10.8
Air District Imperial County 10.2 7.3
Air District Kern County 16.8 10.8
Air District Lake County 16.8 10.8
Air District Lassen County 16.8 10.8
Air District Mariposa
16.8 10.8
Air District Mendocino
16.8 10.8
Air District Modoc County 16.8 10.8
Air District Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Air District Monterey Bay
16.8 10.8
Air District North Coast
16.8 10.8
Air District Northern Sierra 16.8 10.8
Air District Northern
16.8 10.8
Air District Placer County 16.8 10.8
Air District Sacramento 15 10
Attachment A
Air District San Diego
16.8 10.8
Air District San Joaquin
16.8 10.8
Air District San Luis Obispo
13 13
Air District Santa Barbara
8.3 8.3
Air District Shasta County 16.8 10.8
Air District Siskiyou County
16.8 10.8
Air District South Coast 19.8 14.7
Air District Tehama County 16.8 10.8
Air District Tuolumne 16.8 10.8
Air District Ventura County 16.8 10.8
Air District Yolo/Solano 15 10
County Alameda 10.8 10.8
County Alpine 16.8 10.8
County Amador 16.8 10.8
County Butte 12.54 12.54
County Calaveras 16.8 10.8
County Colusa 16.8 10.8
County Contra Costa 10.8 10.8
County Del Norte 16.8 10.8
County El Dorado-Lake 16.8 10.8
County El Dorado-16.8 10.8
County Fresno 16.8 10.8
County Glenn 16.8 10.8
County Humboldt 16.8 10.8
County Imperial 10.2 7.3
County Inyo 16.8 10.8
County Kern-Mojave 16.8 10.8
County Kern-San 16.8 10.8
County Kings 16.8 10.8
County Lake 16.8 10.8
County Lassen 16.8 10.8
County Los Angeles-16.8 10.8
County Los Angeles-19.8 14.7
County Madera 16.8 10.8
County Marin 10.8 10.8
County Mariposa 16.8 10.8
County Mendocino-16.8 10.8
County Mendocino-16.8 10.8
County Mendocino-16.8 10.8
County Mendocino-16.8 10.8
County Merced 16.8 10.8
County Modoc 16.8 10.8
County Mono 16.8 10.8
County Monterey 16.8 10.8
County Napa 10.8 10.8
County Nevada 16.8 10.8
County Orange 19.8 14.7
County Placer-Lake 16.8 10.8
County Placer-Mountain 16.8 10.8
County Placer-16.8 10.8
County Plumas 16.8 10.8
County Riverside-16.8 10.8
County Riverside-
19.8 14.7
County Riverside-Salton 14.6 11
County Riverside-South 19.8 14.7
County Sacramento 15 10
County San Benito 16.8 10.8
County San Bernardino-
16.8 10.8
County San Bernardino-
19.8 14.7
County San Diego 16.8 10.8
County San Francisco 10.8 10.8
County San Joaquin 16.8 10.8
County San Luis Obispo 13 13
County San Mateo 10.8 10.8
County Santa Barbara-
8.3 8.3
County Santa Barbara-
8.3 8.3
County Santa Clara 10.8 10.8
County Santa Cruz 16.8 10.8
County Shasta 16.8 10.8
County Sierra 16.8 10.8
County Siskiyou 16.8 10.8
County Solano-15 10
County Solano-San 16.8 10.8
County Sonoma-North 16.8 10.8
County Sonoma-San 10.8 10.8
County Stanislaus 16.8 10.8
County Sutter 16.8 10.8
County Tehama 16.8 10.8
County Trinity 16.8 10.8
County Tulare 16.8 10.8
County Tuolumne 16.8 10.8
County Ventura 16.8 10.8
County Yolo 15 10
County Yuba 16.8 10.8
Statewide Statewide 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Rural (miles)Urban (miles)
Great Basin Valleys 16.8 10.8
Lake County 16.8 10.8
Lake Tahoe 16.8 10.8
Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Mountain Counties 16.8 10.8
North Central Coast 17.1 12.3
North Coast 16.8 10.8
Northeast Plateau 16.8 10.8
Sacramento Valley 16.8 10.8
Salton Sea 14.6 11
San Diego 16.8 10.8
San Francisco Bay Area 10.8 10.8
San Joaquin Valley 16.8 10.8
South Central Coast 16.8 10.8
South Coast 19.8 14.7
Average 16.47 11.17
Mininum 10.80 10.80
Maximum 19.80 14.70
Range 9.00 3.90
Worker Trip Length by Air Basin
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 2 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 3 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 0.1713 1 8242 1.1662 2.4000e-
003
0.4169 0.0817 0.4986 0.1795 0.0754 0.2549 0 0000 213.1969 213.1969 0.0601 0.0000 214.6993
2022 0.6904 4.1142 6.1625 0 0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0 0000 1,721.682
6
1,721.682
6
0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
7
2023 0.6148 3 3649 5.6747 0 0178 1.1963 0.0996 1.2959 0.3203 0.0935 0.4138 0 0000 1,627.529
5
1,627.529
5
0.1185 0.0000 1,630.492
5
2024 4.1619 0.1335 0.2810 5.9000e-
004
0.0325 6.4700e-
003
0.0390 8.6300e-
003
6.0400e-
003
0.0147 0 0000 52.9078 52.9078 8.0200e-
003
0.0000 53.1082
Maximum 4.1619 4.1142 6.1625 0.0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0.0000 1,721.682
6
1,721.682
6
0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
7
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 4 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 0.1713 1 8242 1.1662 2.4000e-
003
0.4169 0.0817 0.4986 0.1795 0.0754 0.2549 0 0000 213.1967 213.1967 0.0601 0.0000 214.6991
2022 0.6904 4.1142 6.1625 0 0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0 0000 1,721.682
3
1,721.682
3
0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
3
2023 0.6148 3 3648 5.6747 0 0178 1.1963 0.0996 1.2959 0.3203 0.0935 0.4138 0 0000 1,627.529
1
1,627.529
1
0.1185 0.0000 1,630.492
1
2024 4.1619 0.1335 0.2810 5.9000e-
004
0.0325 6.4700e-
003
0.0390 8.6300e-
003
6.0400e-
003
0.0147 0 0000 52.9077 52.9077 8.0200e-
003
0.0000 53.1082
Maximum 4.1619 4.1142 6.1625 0.0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0.0000 1,721.682
3
1,721.682
3
0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
3
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 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
1 9-1-2021 11-30-2021 1.4103 1.4103
2 12-1-2021 2-28-2022 1.3613 1.3613
3 3-1-2022 5-31-2022 1.1985 1.1985
4 6-1-2022 8-31-2022 1.1921 1.1921
5 9-1-2022 11-30-2022 1.1918 1.1918
6 12-1-2022 2-28-2023 1.0774 1.0774
7 3-1-2023 5-31-2023 1.0320 1.0320
8 6-1-2023 8-31-2023 1.0260 1.0260
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 5 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Energy 0.1398 1 2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0 0000 3,896.073
2
3,896.073
2
0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283
3
Mobile 1.5857 7 9962 19.1834 0 0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0 0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 0.0000 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 29.1632 556.6420 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Total 6.8692 9.5223 30.3407 0.0914 7.7979 0.2260 8.0240 2.0895 0.2219 2.3114 236.9712 12,294.18
07
12,531.15
19
15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47
51
Unmitigated Operational
9 9-1-2023 11-30-2023 1.0265 1.0265
10 12-1-2023 2-29-2024 2.8857 2.8857
11 3-1-2024 5-31-2024 1.6207 1.6207
Highest 2.8857 2.8857
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 6 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Energy 0.1398 1 2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0 0000 3,896.073
2
3,896.073
2
0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283
3
Mobile 1.5857 7 9962 19.1834 0 0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0 0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 0.0000 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 29.1632 556.6420 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Total 6.8692 9.5223 30.3407 0.0914 7.7979 0.2260 8.0240 2.0895 0.2219 2.3114 236.9712 12,294.18
07
12,531.15
19
15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47
51
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
0.00 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 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 7 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
OffRoad Equipment
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 8 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 9 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5 8000e-
004
0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601
Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004
0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e-
003
0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 10 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 1.9300e-
003
0.0634 0.0148 1 8000e-
004
3.9400e-
003
1.9000e-
004
4.1300e-
003
1.0800e-
003
1.8000e-
004
1.2600e-
003
0.0000 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e-
003
0.0000 17.4869
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 9.7000e-
004
7.5000e-
004
8.5100e-
003
2 0000e-
005
2.4700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.4900e-
003
6.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
6.7000e-
004
0.0000 2.2251 2.2251 7.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.2267
Total 2.9000e-
003
0.0641 0.0233 2.0000e-
004
6.4100e-
003
2.1000e-
004
6.6200e-
003
1.7300e-
003
2.0000e-
004
1.9300e-
003
0.0000 19.6816 19.6816 1.2800e-
003
0.0000 19.7136
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 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5 8000e-
004
0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600
Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004
0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e-
003
0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 11 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 1.9300e-
003
0.0634 0.0148 1 8000e-
004
3.9400e-
003
1.9000e-
004
4.1300e-
003
1.0800e-
003
1.8000e-
004
1.2600e-
003
0.0000 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e-
003
0.0000 17.4869
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 9.7000e-
004
7.5000e-
004
8.5100e-
003
2 0000e-
005
2.4700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.4900e-
003
6.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
6.7000e-
004
0.0000 2.2251 2.2251 7.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.2267
Total 2.9000e-
003
0.0641 0.0233 2.0000e-
004
6.4100e-
003
2.1000e-
004
6.6200e-
003
1.7300e-
003
2.0000e-
004
1.9300e-
003
0.0000 19.6816 19.6816 1.2800e-
003
0.0000 19.7136
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.1807 0.0000 0.1807 0.0993 0.0000 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3 8000e-
004
0.0204 0.0204 0.0188 0.0188 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061
Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004
0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 12 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 7.7000e-
004
6.0000e-
004
6.8100e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.9700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9900e-
003
5.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
5.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.7814
Total 7.7000e-
004
6.0000e-
004
6.8100e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9900e-
003
5.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
5.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.7814
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 0.1807 0.0000 0.1807 0.0993 0.0000 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3 8000e-
004
0.0204 0.0204 0.0188 0.0188 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060
Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004
0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 13 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 7.7000e-
004
6.0000e-
004
6.8100e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.9700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9900e-
003
5.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
5.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.7814
Total 7.7000e-
004
6.0000e-
004
6.8100e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9900e-
003
5.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
5.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.7814
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 0.0693 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 103.5405 103 5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776
Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5405 103.5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 14 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 1.6400e-
003
1.2700e-
003
0.0144 4 0000e-
005
4.1600e-
003
3.0000e-
005
4.2000e-
003
1.1100e-
003
3.0000e-
005
1.1400e-
003
0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004
0.0000 3.7607
Total 1.6400e-
003
1.2700e-
003
0.0144 4.0000e-
005
4.1600e-
003
3.0000e-
005
4.2000e-
003
1.1100e-
003
3.0000e-
005
1.1400e-
003
0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004
0.0000 3.7607
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 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 0.0693 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 103.5403 103 5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775
Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5403 103.5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 15 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 1.6400e-
003
1.2700e-
003
0.0144 4 0000e-
005
4.1600e-
003
3.0000e-
005
4.2000e-
003
1.1100e-
003
3.0000e-
005
1.1400e-
003
0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004
0.0000 3.7607
Total 1.6400e-
003
1.2700e-
003
0.0144 4.0000e-
005
4.1600e-
003
3.0000e-
005
4.2000e-
003
1.1100e-
003
3.0000e-
005
1.1400e-
003
0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004
0.0000 3.7607
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0807 0.0000 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2 2000e-
004
5.7200e-
003
5.7200e-
003
5.2600e-
003
5.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004
0.0807 5.7200e-
003
0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e-
003
0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 16 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 2.8000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1 0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.1000e-
004
0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6684
Total 2.8000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.1000e-
004
0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6684
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 0.0807 0.0000 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2 2000e-
004
5.7200e-
003
5.7200e-
003
5.2600e-
003
5.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004
0.0807 5.7200e-
003
0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e-
003
0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 17 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 2.8000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1 0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.1000e-
004
0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6684
Total 2.8000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.1000e-
004
0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6684
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881
Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 18 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.0527 1.6961 0.4580 4 5500e-
003
0.1140 3.1800e-
003
0.1171 0.0329 3.0400e-
003
0.0359 0.0000 441.9835 441 9835 0.0264 0.0000 442.6435
Worker 0.4088 0.3066 3.5305 0.0107 1.1103 8.8700e-
003
1.1192 0.2949 8.1700e-
003
0.3031 0.0000 966.8117 966 8117 0.0266 0.0000 967.4773
Total 0.4616 2.0027 3.9885 0.0152 1.2243 0.0121 1.2363 0.3278 0.0112 0.3390 0.0000 1,408.795
2
1,408.795
2
0.0530 0.0000 1,410.120
8
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 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877
Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 19 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.0527 1.6961 0.4580 4 5500e-
003
0.1140 3.1800e-
003
0.1171 0.0329 3.0400e-
003
0.0359 0.0000 441.9835 441 9835 0.0264 0.0000 442.6435
Worker 0.4088 0.3066 3.5305 0.0107 1.1103 8.8700e-
003
1.1192 0.2949 8.1700e-
003
0.3031 0.0000 966.8117 966 8117 0.0266 0.0000 967.4773
Total 0.4616 2.0027 3.9885 0.0152 1.2243 0.0121 1.2363 0.3278 0.0112 0.3390 0.0000 1,408.795
2
1,408.795
2
0.0530 0.0000 1,410.120
8
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3 3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286 2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814
Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286.2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 20 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.0382 1.2511 0.4011 4 3000e-
003
0.1113 1.4600e-
003
0.1127 0.0321 1.4000e-
003
0.0335 0.0000 417.9930 417 9930 0.0228 0.0000 418.5624
Worker 0.3753 0.2708 3.1696 0.0101 1.0840 8.4100e-
003
1.0924 0.2879 7.7400e-
003
0.2957 0.0000 909.3439 909 3439 0.0234 0.0000 909.9291
Total 0.4135 1.5218 3.5707 0.0144 1.1953 9.8700e-
003
1.2051 0.3200 9.1400e-
003
0.3292 0.0000 1,327.336
9
1,327.336
9
0.0462 0.0000 1,328.491
6
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 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3 3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286 2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811
Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286.2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 21 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.0382 1.2511 0.4011 4 3000e-
003
0.1113 1.4600e-
003
0.1127 0.0321 1.4000e-
003
0.0335 0.0000 417.9930 417 9930 0.0228 0.0000 418.5624
Worker 0.3753 0.2708 3.1696 0.0101 1.0840 8.4100e-
003
1.0924 0.2879 7.7400e-
003
0.2957 0.0000 909.3439 909 3439 0.0234 0.0000 909.9291
Total 0.4135 1.5218 3.5707 0.0144 1.1953 9.8700e-
003
1.2051 0.3200 9.1400e-
003
0.3292 0.0000 1,327.336
9
1,327.336
9
0.0462 0.0000 1,328.491
6
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1 5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 22 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 3.7000e-
004
2.7000e-
004
3.1200e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0800e-
003
2.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.8968
Total 3.7000e-
004
2.7000e-
004
3.1200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0800e-
003
2.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.8968
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 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1 5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 23 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 3.7000e-
004
2.7000e-
004
3.1200e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0800e-
003
2.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.8968
Total 3.7000e-
004
2.7000e-
004
3.1200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0800e-
003
2.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.8968
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2 5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 24 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 5.9000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
4.9200e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.8100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.8200e-
003
4.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.4706
Total 5.9000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
4.9200e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.8100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.8200e-
003
4.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.4706
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 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2 5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 25 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 5.9000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
4.9200e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.8100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.8200e-
003
4.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.4706
Total 5.9000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
4.9200e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.8100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.8200e-
003
4.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.4706
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1600e-
003
0.0213 0.0317 5 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 26 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.0101 6.9900e-
003
0.0835 2 8000e-
004
0.0307 2.3000e-
004
0.0309 8.1500e-
003
2.2000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004
0.0000 24.9558
Total 0.0101 6.9900e-
003
0.0835 2.8000e-
004
0.0307 2.3000e-
004
0.0309 8.1500e-
003
2.2000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004
0.0000 24.9558
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 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1600e-
003
0.0213 0.0317 5 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 27 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.0101 6.9900e-
003
0.0835 2 8000e-
004
0.0307 2.3000e-
004
0.0309 8.1500e-
003
2.2000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004
0.0000 24.9558
Total 0.0101 6.9900e-
003
0.0835 2.8000e-
004
0.0307 2.3000e-
004
0.0309 8.1500e-
003
2.2000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004
0.0000 24.9558
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 28 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Unmitigated 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 29 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 30 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Electricity
Mitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2,512.646
5
2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Electricity
Unmitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2,512.646
5
2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
7
1,383.426
7
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
7
1,383.426
7
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 31 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
408494 2.2000e-
003
0.0188 8.0100e-
003
1.2000e-
004
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
0.0000 21.7988 21.7988 4.2000e-
004
4.0000e-
004
21.9284
Apartments Mid
Rise
1.30613e
+007
0.0704 0.6018 0.2561 3.8400e-
003
0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 696.9989 696.9989 0.0134 0.0128 701.1408
General Office
Building
468450 2.5300e-
003
0.0230 0.0193 1.4000e-
004
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
0.0000 24.9983 24.9983 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1468
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
8.30736e
+006
0.0448 0.4072 0.3421 2.4400e-
003
0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 443.3124 443.3124 8.5000e-
003
8.1300e-
003
445.9468
Hotel 1.74095e
+006
9.3900e-
003
0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
0.0000 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e-
003
1.7000e-
003
93.4557
Quality
Restaurant
1.84608e
+006
9.9500e-
003
0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e-
004
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e-
003
1.8100e-
003
99.0993
Regional
Shopping Center
91840 5.0000e-
004
4.5000e-
003
3.7800e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 4.9009 4.9009 9.0000e-
005
9.0000e-
005
4.9301
Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
8
1,383.426
8
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 32 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
408494 2.2000e-
003
0.0188 8.0100e-
003
1.2000e-
004
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
0.0000 21.7988 21.7988 4.2000e-
004
4.0000e-
004
21.9284
Apartments Mid
Rise
1.30613e
+007
0.0704 0.6018 0.2561 3.8400e-
003
0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 696.9989 696.9989 0.0134 0.0128 701.1408
General Office
Building
468450 2.5300e-
003
0.0230 0.0193 1.4000e-
004
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
0.0000 24.9983 24.9983 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1468
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
8.30736e
+006
0.0448 0.4072 0.3421 2.4400e-
003
0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 443.3124 443.3124 8.5000e-
003
8.1300e-
003
445.9468
Hotel 1.74095e
+006
9.3900e-
003
0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
0.0000 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e-
003
1.7000e-
003
93.4557
Quality
Restaurant
1.84608e
+006
9.9500e-
003
0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e-
004
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e-
003
1.8100e-
003
99.0993
Regional
Shopping Center
91840 5.0000e-
004
4.5000e-
003
3.7800e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 4.9009 4.9009 9.0000e-
005
9.0000e-
005
4.9301
Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
8
1,383.426
8
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 33 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
106010 33.7770 1.3900e-
003
2.9000e-
004
33.8978
Apartments Mid
Rise
3.94697e
+006
1,257.587
9
0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086
9
General Office
Building
584550 186.2502 7.6900e-
003
1.5900e-
003
186.9165
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
1.58904e
+006
506.3022 0.0209 4.3200e-
003
508.1135
Hotel 550308 175.3399 7.2400e-
003
1.5000e-
003
175.9672
Quality
Restaurant
353120 112.5116 4.6500e-
003
9.6000e-
004
112.9141
Regional
Shopping Center
756000 240.8778 9.9400e-
003
2.0600e-
003
241.7395
Total 2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 34 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
106010 33.7770 1.3900e-
003
2.9000e-
004
33.8978
Apartments Mid
Rise
3.94697e
+006
1,257.587
9
0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086
9
General Office
Building
584550 186.2502 7.6900e-
003
1.5900e-
003
186.9165
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
1.58904e
+006
506.3022 0.0209 4.3200e-
003
508.1135
Hotel 550308 175.3399 7.2400e-
003
1.5000e-
003
175.9672
Quality
Restaurant
353120 112.5116 4.6500e-
003
9.6000e-
004
112.9141
Regional
Shopping Center
756000 240.8778 9.9400e-
003
2.0600e-
003
241.7395
Total 2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 35 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Unmitigated 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
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
0.4137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
4.3998 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0206 0.1763 0.0750 1.1200e-
003
0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0 0000 204.1166 204.1166 3.9100e-
003
3.7400e-
003
205.3295
Landscaping 0.3096 0.1187 10.3054 5.4000e-
004
0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0 0000 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540
Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 36 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
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
0.4137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
4.3998 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0206 0.1763 0.0750 1.1200e-
003
0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0 0000 204.1166 204.1166 3.9100e-
003
3.7400e-
003
205.3295
Landscaping 0.3096 0.1187 10.3054 5.4000e-
004
0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0 0000 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540
Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 37 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 585.8052 3 0183 0.0755 683.7567
Unmitigated 585.8052 3 0183 0.0755 683.7567
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 38 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
1.62885 /
1.02688
10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e-
003
12.6471
Apartments Mid
Rise
63.5252 /
40.0485
425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363
General Office
Building
7.99802 /
4.90201
53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e-
003
61.6019
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
10.9272 /
0.697482
51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e-
003
62.8482
Hotel 1.26834 /
0.140927
6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e-
003
7.5079
Quality
Restaurant
2.42827 /
0.154996
11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e-
003
13.9663
Regional
Shopping Center
4.14806 /
2.54236
27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e-
003
31.9490
Total 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 39 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.62885 /
1.02688
10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e-
003
12.6471
Apartments Mid
Rise
63.5252 /
40.0485
425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363
General Office
Building
7.99802 /
4.90201
53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e-
003
61.6019
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
10.9272 /
0.697482
51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e-
003
62.8482
Hotel 1.26834 /
0.140927
6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e-
003
7.5079
Quality
Restaurant
2.42827 /
0.154996
11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e-
003
13.9663
Regional
Shopping Center
4.14806 /
2.54236
27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e-
003
31.9490
Total 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Mitigated
8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 40 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Unmitigated 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 41 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
11.5 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834
Apartments Mid
Rise
448.5 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 225.5513
General Office
Building
41.85 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 21.0464
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
428.4 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430
Hotel 27.38 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 13.7694
Quality
Restaurant
7.3 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712
Regional
Shopping Center
58.8 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706
Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 42 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
11.5 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834
Apartments Mid
Rise
448.5 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 225.5513
General Office
Building
41.85 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 21.0464
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
428.4 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430
Hotel 27.38 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 13.7694
Quality
Restaurant
7.3 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712
Regional
Shopping Center
58.8 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706
Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Mitigated
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
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 43 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
11.0 Vegetation
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 44 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0
Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72
Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789
Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 1 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 2 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 3 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2769 46.4588 31.6840 0 0643 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0 0000 6,234.797
4
6,234.797
4
1.9495 0.0000 6,283.535
2
2022 5.3304 38.8967 49.5629 0.1517 9.8688 1.6366 10.7727 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0 0000 15,251.56
74
15,251.56
74
1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88
2023 4.8957 26.3317 46.7567 0.1472 9.8688 0.7794 10.6482 2.6381 0.7322 3.3702 0 0000 14,807.52
69
14,807.52
69
1.0250 0.0000 14,833.15
21
2024 237.1630 9 5575 15.1043 0 0244 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0 0000 2,361.398
9
2,361.398
9
0.7177 0.0000 2,379.342
1
Maximum 237.1630 46.4588 49.5629 0.1517 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 15,251.56
74
15,251.56
74
1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 4 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2769 46.4588 31.6840 0 0643 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0 0000 6,234.797
4
6,234.797
4
1.9495 0.0000 6,283.535
2
2022 5.3304 38.8967 49.5629 0.1517 9.8688 1.6366 10.7727 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0 0000 15,251.56
74
15,251.56
74
1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88
2023 4.8957 26.3317 46.7567 0.1472 9.8688 0.7794 10.6482 2.6381 0.7322 3.3702 0 0000 14,807.52
69
14,807.52
69
1.0250 0.0000 14,833.15
20
2024 237.1630 9 5575 15.1043 0 0244 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0 0000 2,361.398
9
2,361.398
9
0.7177 0.0000 2,379.342
1
Maximum 237.1630 46.4588 49.5629 0.1517 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 15,251.56
74
15,251.56
74
1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88
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 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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 5 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Total 41.1168 67.2262 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18
16
76,811.18
16
2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87
86
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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Total 41.1168 67.2262 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18
16
76,811.18
16
2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87
86
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 6 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
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
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 0.00
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 7 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 8 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 9 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241
3
1,292.241
3
0.0877 1,294.433
7
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 0.0643 0.0442 0.6042 1.7100e-
003
0.1677 1.3500e-
003
0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003
0.0457 170.8155 170 8155 5.0300e-
003
170.9413
Total 0.1916 4.1394 1.5644 0.0136 0.4346 0.0139 0.4485 0.1176 0.0133 0.1309 1,463.056
8
1,463.056
8
0.0927 1,465.375
0
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 10 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241
3
1,292.241
3
0.0877 1,294.433
7
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 0.0643 0.0442 0.6042 1.7100e-
003
0.1677 1.3500e-
003
0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003
0.0457 170.8155 170 8155 5.0300e-
003
170.9413
Total 0.1916 4.1394 1.5644 0.0136 0.4346 0.0139 0.4485 0.1176 0.0133 0.1309 1,463.056
8
1,463.056
8
0.0927 1,465.375
0
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 11 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2 0600e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 204.9786 204 9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
Total 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2.0600e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
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 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 12 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2 0600e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 204.9786 204 9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
Total 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2.0600e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 13 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2 2900e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
Total 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2.2900e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 14 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2 2900e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
Total 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2.2900e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 15 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2 2100e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
Total 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2.2100e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 16 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2 2100e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
Total 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2.2100e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 17 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4079 13 2032 3.4341 0.0364 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548
2
3,896.548
2
0.2236 3,902.138
4
Worker 3.2162 2.1318 29.7654 0.0883 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,800.685
7
8,800.685
7
0.2429 8,806.758
2
Total 3.6242 15.3350 33.1995 0.1247 9.8688 0.0949 9.9637 2.6381 0.0883 2.7263 12,697.23
39
12,697.23
39
0.4665 12,708.89
66
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 18 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4079 13 2032 3.4341 0.0364 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548
2
3,896.548
2
0.2236 3,902.138
4
Worker 3.2162 2.1318 29.7654 0.0883 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,800.685
7
8,800.685
7
0.2429 8,806.758
2
Total 3.6242 15.3350 33.1995 0.1247 9.8688 0.0949 9.9637 2.6381 0.0883 2.7263 12,697.23
39
12,697.23
39
0.4665 12,708.89
66
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 19 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3027 10 0181 3.1014 0.0352 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 3,773.876
2
3,773.876
2
0.1982 3,778.830
0
Worker 3.0203 1.9287 27.4113 0.0851 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 8,478.440
8
8,478.440
8
0.2190 8,483.916
0
Total 3.3229 11.9468 30.5127 0.1203 9.8688 0.0797 9.9485 2.6381 0.0738 2.7118 12,252.31
70
12,252.31
70
0.4172 12,262.74
60
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 20 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3027 10 0181 3.1014 0.0352 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 3,773.876
2
3,773.876
2
0.1982 3,778.830
0
Worker 3.0203 1.9287 27.4113 0.0851 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 8,478.440
8
8,478.440
8
0.2190 8,483.916
0
Total 3.3229 11.9468 30.5127 0.1203 9.8688 0.0797 9.9485 2.6381 0.0738 2.7118 12,252.31
70
12,252.31
70
0.4172 12,262.74
60
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 21 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1 5900e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
Total 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1.5900e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 22 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1 5900e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
Total 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1.5900e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 23 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1 5400e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 153.8517 153 8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
Total 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1.5400e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 24 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1 5400e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 153.8517 153 8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
Total 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1.5400e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 25 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085
2
1,641.085
2
0.0401 1,642.088
6
Total 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085
2
1,641.085
2
0.0401 1,642.088
6
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 26 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085
2
1,641.085
2
0.0401 1,642.088
6
Total 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085
2
1,641.085
2
0.0401 1,642.088
6
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 27 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Unmitigated 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 28 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 29 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 30 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
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
Apartments Low
Rise
1119.16 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35784.3 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1283.42 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22759.9 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4769.72 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5057.75 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
251.616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 31 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.11916 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35.7843 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1.28342 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22.7599 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4.76972 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5.05775 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
0.251616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 32 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 33 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste 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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 34 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
11.0 Vegetation
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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 35 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0
Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72
Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789
Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 1 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 2 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 3 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2865 46.4651 31.6150 0 0642 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0 0000 6,221.493
7
6,221.493
7
1.9491 0.0000 6,270.221
4
2022 5.7218 38.9024 47.3319 0.1455 9.8688 1.6366 10.7736 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0 0000 14,630.30
99
14,630.30
99
1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63
2023 5.2705 26.4914 44.5936 0.1413 9.8688 0.7800 10.6488 2.6381 0.7328 3.3708 0 0000 14,210.34
24
14,210.34
24
1.0230 0.0000 14,235.91
60
2024 237.2328 9 5610 15.0611 0 0243 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0 0000 2,352.417
8
2,352.417
8
0.7175 0.0000 2,370.355
0
Maximum 237.2328 46.4651 47.3319 0.1455 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 14,630.30
99
14,630.30
99
1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 4 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2865 46.4651 31.6150 0 0642 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0 0000 6,221.493
7
6,221.493
7
1.9491 0.0000 6,270.221
4
2022 5.7218 38.9024 47.3319 0.1455 9.8688 1.6366 10.7736 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0 0000 14,630.30
99
14,630.30
99
1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63
2023 5.2705 26.4914 44.5936 0.1413 9.8688 0.7800 10.6488 2.6381 0.7328 3.3708 0 0000 14,210.34
24
14,210.34
24
1.0230 0.0000 14,235.91
60
2024 237.2328 9 5610 15.0611 0 0243 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0 0000 2,352.417
8
2,352.417
8
0.7175 0.0000 2,370.355
0
Maximum 237.2328 46.4651 47.3319 0.1455 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 14,630.30
99
14,630.30
99
1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63
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 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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 5 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.5233 45.9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Total 40.7912 67.7872 202.7424 0.6043 45.9592 2.4640 48.4231 12.2950 2.4399 14.7349 0.0000 74,422.37
87
74,422.37
87
2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44
17
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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.5233 45.9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Total 40.7912 67.7872 202.7424 0.6043 45.9592 2.4640 48.4231 12.2950 2.4399 14.7349 0.0000 74,422.37
87
74,422.37
87
2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44
17
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 6 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
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
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 0.00
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 7 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 8 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 9 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855
5
1,269.855
5
0.0908 1,272.125
2
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 0.0715 0.0489 0.5524 1.6100e-
003
0.1677 1.3500e-
003
0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003
0.0457 160.8377 160 8377 4.7300e-
003
160.9560
Total 0.2019 4.1943 1.5706 0.0133 0.4346 0.0141 0.4487 0.1176 0.0135 0.1311 1,430.693
2
1,430.693
2
0.0955 1,433.081
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
Fugitive Dust 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 10 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855
5
1,269.855
5
0.0908 1,272.125
2
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 0.0715 0.0489 0.5524 1.6100e-
003
0.1677 1.3500e-
003
0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003
0.0457 160.8377 160 8377 4.7300e-
003
160.9560
Total 0.2019 4.1943 1.5706 0.0133 0.4346 0.0141 0.4487 0.1176 0.0135 0.1311 1,430.693
2
1,430.693
2
0.0955 1,433.081
2
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 11 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1 9400e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 193.0052 193 0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
Total 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1.9400e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
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 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 12 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1 9400e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 193.0052 193 0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
Total 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1.9400e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 13 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
Total 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 14 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
Total 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 15 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2 0800e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 206.9139 206 9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
Total 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2.0800e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 16 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2 0800e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 206.9139 206 9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
Total 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2.0800e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 17 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4284 13.1673 3.8005 0.0354 0.9155 0.0256 0.9412 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075
0
3,789.075
0
0.2381 3,795.028
3
Worker 3.5872 2.3593 27.1680 0.0832 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,286.901
3
8,286.901
3
0.2282 8,292.605
8
Total 4.0156 15.5266 30.9685 0.1186 9.8688 0.0957 9.9645 2.6381 0.0891 2.7271 12,075.97
63
12,075.97
63
0.4663 12,087.63
41
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 18 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4284 13.1673 3.8005 0.0354 0.9155 0.0256 0.9412 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075
0
3,789.075
0
0.2381 3,795.028
3
Worker 3.5872 2.3593 27.1680 0.0832 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,286.901
3
8,286.901
3
0.2282 8,292.605
8
Total 4.0156 15.5266 30.9685 0.1186 9.8688 0.0957 9.9645 2.6381 0.0891 2.7271 12,075.97
63
12,075.97
63
0.4663 12,087.63
41
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 19 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3183 9.9726 3.3771 0.0343 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 3,671.400
7
3,671.400
7
0.2096 3,676.641
7
Worker 3.3795 2.1338 24.9725 0.0801 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 7,983.731
8
7,983.731
8
0.2055 7,988.868
3
Total 3.6978 12.1065 28.3496 0.1144 9.8688 0.0803 9.9491 2.6381 0.0743 2.7124 11,655.13
25
11,655.13
25
0.4151 11,665.50
99
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 20 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3183 9.9726 3.3771 0.0343 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 3,671.400
7
3,671.400
7
0.2096 3,676.641
7
Worker 3.3795 2.1338 24.9725 0.0801 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 7,983.731
8
7,983.731
8
0.2055 7,988.868
3
Total 3.6978 12.1065 28.3496 0.1144 9.8688 0.0803 9.9491 2.6381 0.0743 2.7124 11,655.13
25
11,655.13
25
0.4151 11,665.50
99
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 21 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1 5000e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 149.5081 149 5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
Total 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1.5000e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 22 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1 5000e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 149.5081 149 5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
Total 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1.5000e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 23 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 144.8706 144 8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
Total 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 24 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 144.8706 144 8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
Total 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 25 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.6406 0.3886 4.6439 0.0155 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,545.286
0
1,545.286
0
0.0376 1,546.226
2
Total 0.6406 0.3886 4.6439 0.0155 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,545.286
0
1,545.286
0
0.0376 1,546.226
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
Archit. Coating 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 26 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.6406 0.3886 4.6439 0.0155 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,545.286
0
1,545.286
0
0.0376 1,546.226
2
Total 0.6406 0.3886 4.6439 0.0155 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,545.286
0
1,545.286
0
0.0376 1,546.226
2
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 27 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 9.5233 45 9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Unmitigated 9.5233 45 9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 28 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 29 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 30 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
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
Apartments Low
Rise
1119.16 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35784.3 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1283.42 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22759.9 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4769.72 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5057.75 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
251.616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 31 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.11916 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35.7843 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1.28342 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22.7599 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4.76972 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5.05775 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
0.251616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 32 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 33 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste 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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 34 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
11.0 Vegetation
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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 35 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0
Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72
Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789
Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 1 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Trips and VMT - Local hire provision
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 2 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 3 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 0.1704 1 8234 1.1577 2.3800e-
003
0.4141 0.0817 0.4958 0.1788 0.0754 0.2542 0 0000 210.7654 210.7654 0.0600 0.0000 212.2661
2022 0.5865 4 0240 5.1546 0 0155 0.9509 0.1175 1.0683 0.2518 0.1103 0.3621 0 0000 1,418.655
4
1,418.655
4
0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692
5
2023 0.5190 3 2850 4.7678 0 0147 0.8497 0.0971 0.9468 0.2283 0.0912 0.3195 0 0000 1,342.441
2
1,342.441
2
0.1115 0.0000 1,345.229
1
2024 4.1592 0.1313 0.2557 5.0000e-
004
0.0221 6.3900e-
003
0.0285 5.8700e-
003
5.9700e-
003
0.0118 0 0000 44.6355 44.6355 7.8300e-
003
0.0000 44.8311
Maximum 4.1592 4.0240 5.1546 0.0155 0.9509 0.1175 1.0683 0.2518 0.1103 0.3621 0.0000 1,418.655
4
1,418.655
4
0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692
5
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 4 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 0.1704 1 8234 1.1577 2.3800e-
003
0.4141 0.0817 0.4958 0.1788 0.0754 0.2542 0 0000 210.7651 210.7651 0.0600 0.0000 212.2658
2022 0.5865 4 0240 5.1546 0 0155 0.9509 0.1175 1.0683 0.2518 0.1103 0.3621 0 0000 1,418.655
0
1,418.655
0
0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692
1
2023 0.5190 3 2850 4.7678 0 0147 0.8497 0.0971 0.9468 0.2283 0.0912 0.3195 0 0000 1,342.440
9
1,342.440
9
0.1115 0.0000 1,345.228
7
2024 4.1592 0.1313 0.2557 5.0000e-
004
0.0221 6.3900e-
003
0.0285 5.8700e-
003
5.9700e-
003
0.0118 0 0000 44.6354 44.6354 7.8300e-
003
0.0000 44.8311
Maximum 4.1592 4.0240 5.1546 0.0155 0.9509 0.1175 1.0683 0.2518 0.1103 0.3621 0.0000 1,418.655
0
1,418.655
0
0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692
1
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 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
1 9-1-2021 11-30-2021 1.4091 1.4091
2 12-1-2021 2-28-2022 1.3329 1.3329
3 3-1-2022 5-31-2022 1.1499 1.1499
4 6-1-2022 8-31-2022 1.1457 1.1457
5 9-1-2022 11-30-2022 1.1415 1.1415
6 12-1-2022 2-28-2023 1.0278 1.0278
7 3-1-2023 5-31-2023 0.9868 0.9868
8 6-1-2023 8-31-2023 0.9831 0.9831
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 5 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Energy 0.1398 1 2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0 0000 3,896.073
2
3,896.073
2
0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283
3
Mobile 1.5857 7 9962 19.1834 0 0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0 0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 0.0000 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 29.1632 556.6420 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Total 6.8692 9.5223 30.3407 0.0914 7.7979 0.2260 8.0240 2.0895 0.2219 2.3114 236.9712 12,294.18
07
12,531.15
19
15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47
51
Unmitigated Operational
9 9-1-2023 11-30-2023 0.9798 0.9798
10 12-1-2023 2-29-2024 2.8757 2.8757
11 3-1-2024 5-31-2024 1.6188 1.6188
Highest 2.8757 2.8757
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 6 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Energy 0.1398 1 2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0 0000 3,896.073
2
3,896.073
2
0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283
3
Mobile 1.5857 7 9962 19.1834 0 0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0 0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 0.0000 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 29.1632 556.6420 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Total 6.8692 9.5223 30.3407 0.0914 7.7979 0.2260 8.0240 2.0895 0.2219 2.3114 236.9712 12,294.18
07
12,531.15
19
15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47
51
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
0.00 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 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 7 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
OffRoad Equipment
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 8 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 9 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5 8000e-
004
0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601
Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004
0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e-
003
0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 10 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 1.9300e-
003
0.0634 0.0148 1 8000e-
004
3.9400e-
003
1.9000e-
004
4.1300e-
003
1.0800e-
003
1.8000e-
004
1.2600e-
003
0.0000 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e-
003
0.0000 17.4869
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 7.2000e-
004
5.3000e-
004
6.0900e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6900e-
003
4.5000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.6000e-
004
0.0000 1.5281 1.5281 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.5293
Total 2.6500e-
003
0.0639 0.0209 2.0000e-
004
5.6200e-
003
2.0000e-
004
5.8200e-
003
1.5300e-
003
1.9000e-
004
1.7200e-
003
0.0000 18.9847 18.9847 1.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0161
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 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5 8000e-
004
0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600
Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004
0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e-
003
0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 11 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 1.9300e-
003
0.0634 0.0148 1 8000e-
004
3.9400e-
003
1.9000e-
004
4.1300e-
003
1.0800e-
003
1.8000e-
004
1.2600e-
003
0.0000 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e-
003
0.0000 17.4869
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 7.2000e-
004
5.3000e-
004
6.0900e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6900e-
003
4.5000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.6000e-
004
0.0000 1.5281 1.5281 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.5293
Total 2.6500e-
003
0.0639 0.0209 2.0000e-
004
5.6200e-
003
2.0000e-
004
5.8200e-
003
1.5300e-
003
1.9000e-
004
1.7200e-
003
0.0000 18.9847 18.9847 1.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0161
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.1807 0.0000 0.1807 0.0993 0.0000 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3 8000e-
004
0.0204 0.0204 0.0188 0.0188 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061
Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004
0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 12 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 5.8000e-
004
4.3000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.3400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3500e-
003
3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.2225 1.2225 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.2234
Total 5.8000e-
004
4.3000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3500e-
003
3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.2225 1.2225 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.2234
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 0.1807 0.0000 0.1807 0.0993 0.0000 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3 8000e-
004
0.0204 0.0204 0.0188 0.0188 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060
Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004
0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 13 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 5.8000e-
004
4.3000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.3400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3500e-
003
3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.2225 1.2225 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.2234
Total 5.8000e-
004
4.3000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3500e-
003
3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.2225 1.2225 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.2234
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 0.0693 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 103.5405 103 5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776
Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5405 103.5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 14 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 1.2200e-
003
9.0000e-
004
0.0103 3 0000e-
005
2.8300e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.8600e-
003
7.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
7.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.5808 2.5808 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.5828
Total 1.2200e-
003
9.0000e-
004
0.0103 3.0000e-
005
2.8300e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.8600e-
003
7.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
7.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.5808 2.5808 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.5828
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 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 0.0693 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 103.5403 103 5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775
Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5403 103.5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 15 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 1.2200e-
003
9.0000e-
004
0.0103 3 0000e-
005
2.8300e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.8600e-
003
7.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
7.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.5808 2.5808 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.5828
Total 1.2200e-
003
9.0000e-
004
0.0103 3.0000e-
005
2.8300e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.8600e-
003
7.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
7.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.5808 2.5808 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.5828
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0807 0.0000 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2 2000e-
004
5.7200e-
003
5.7200e-
003
5.2600e-
003
5.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004
0.0807 5.7200e-
003
0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e-
003
0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 16 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 2.1000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
1.7400e-
003
1 0000e-
005
5.2000e-
004
0.0000 5.3000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 0.4587 0.4587 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.4590
Total 2.1000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
1.7400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
5.2000e-
004
0.0000 5.3000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 0.4587 0.4587 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.4590
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 0.0807 0.0000 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2 2000e-
004
5.7200e-
003
5.7200e-
003
5.2600e-
003
5.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004
0.0807 5.7200e-
003
0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e-
003
0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 17 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 2.1000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
1.7400e-
003
1 0000e-
005
5.2000e-
004
0.0000 5.3000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 0.4587 0.4587 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.4590
Total 2.1000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
1.7400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
5.2000e-
004
0.0000 5.3000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 0.4587 0.4587 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.4590
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881
Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 18 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.0527 1.6961 0.4580 4 5500e-
003
0.1140 3.1800e-
003
0.1171 0.0329 3.0400e-
003
0.0359 0.0000 441.9835 441 9835 0.0264 0.0000 442.6435
Worker 0.3051 0.2164 2.5233 7 3500e-
003
0.7557 6.2300e-
003
0.7619 0.2007 5.7400e-
003
0.2065 0.0000 663.9936 663 9936 0.0187 0.0000 664.4604
Total 0.3578 1.9125 2.9812 0.0119 0.8696 9.4100e-
003
0.8790 0.2336 8.7800e-
003
0.2424 0.0000 1,105.977
1
1,105.977
1
0.0451 0.0000 1,107.103
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 tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877
Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 19 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.0527 1.6961 0.4580 4 5500e-
003
0.1140 3.1800e-
003
0.1171 0.0329 3.0400e-
003
0.0359 0.0000 441.9835 441 9835 0.0264 0.0000 442.6435
Worker 0.3051 0.2164 2.5233 7 3500e-
003
0.7557 6.2300e-
003
0.7619 0.2007 5.7400e-
003
0.2065 0.0000 663.9936 663 9936 0.0187 0.0000 664.4604
Total 0.3578 1.9125 2.9812 0.0119 0.8696 9.4100e-
003
0.8790 0.2336 8.7800e-
003
0.2424 0.0000 1,105.977
1
1,105.977
1
0.0451 0.0000 1,107.103
9
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3 3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286 2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814
Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286.2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 20 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.0382 1.2511 0.4011 4 3000e-
003
0.1113 1.4600e-
003
0.1127 0.0321 1.4000e-
003
0.0335 0.0000 417.9930 417 9930 0.0228 0.0000 418.5624
Worker 0.2795 0.1910 2.2635 6 9100e-
003
0.7377 5.9100e-
003
0.7436 0.1960 5.4500e-
003
0.2014 0.0000 624.5363 624 5363 0.0164 0.0000 624.9466
Total 0.3177 1.4420 2.6646 0.0112 0.8490 7.3700e-
003
0.8564 0.2281 6.8500e-
003
0.2349 0.0000 1,042.529
4
1,042.529
4
0.0392 0.0000 1,043.509
0
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 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3 3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286 2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811
Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286.2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 21 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.0382 1.2511 0.4011 4 3000e-
003
0.1113 1.4600e-
003
0.1127 0.0321 1.4000e-
003
0.0335 0.0000 417.9930 417 9930 0.0228 0.0000 418.5624
Worker 0.2795 0.1910 2.2635 6 9100e-
003
0.7377 5.9100e-
003
0.7436 0.1960 5.4500e-
003
0.2014 0.0000 624.5363 624 5363 0.0164 0.0000 624.9466
Total 0.3177 1.4420 2.6646 0.0112 0.8490 7.3700e-
003
0.8564 0.2281 6.8500e-
003
0.2349 0.0000 1,042.529
4
1,042.529
4
0.0392 0.0000 1,043.509
0
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1 5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 22 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 2.8000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
2.2300e-
003
1 0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.6156 0.6156 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6160
Total 2.8000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
2.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.6156 0.6156 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6160
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 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1 5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 23 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 2.8000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
2.2300e-
003
1 0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.6156 0.6156 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6160
Total 2.8000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
2.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.6156 0.6156 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6160
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2 5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 24 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 4.4000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
3.5100e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2400e-
003
3.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.0094 1.0094 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0100
Total 4.4000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
3.5100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2400e-
003
3.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.0094 1.0094 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0100
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 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2 5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 25 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 4.4000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
3.5100e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2400e-
003
3.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.0094 1.0094 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0100
Total 4.4000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
3.5100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2400e-
003
3.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.0094 1.0094 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0100
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1600e-
003
0.0213 0.0317 5 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 26 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 7.4800e-
003
4.9300e-
003
0.0596 1 9000e-
004
0.0209 1.6000e-
004
0.0211 5.5500e-
003
1.5000e-
004
5.7000e-
003
0.0000 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 17.1394
Total 7.4800e-
003
4.9300e-
003
0.0596 1.9000e-
004
0.0209 1.6000e-
004
0.0211 5.5500e-
003
1.5000e-
004
5.7000e-
003
0.0000 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 17.1394
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 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1600e-
003
0.0213 0.0317 5 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 27 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 7.4800e-
003
4.9300e-
003
0.0596 1 9000e-
004
0.0209 1.6000e-
004
0.0211 5.5500e-
003
1.5000e-
004
5.7000e-
003
0.0000 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 17.1394
Total 7.4800e-
003
4.9300e-
003
0.0596 1.9000e-
004
0.0209 1.6000e-
004
0.0211 5.5500e-
003
1.5000e-
004
5.7000e-
003
0.0000 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 17.1394
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 28 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Unmitigated 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 29 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 30 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Electricity
Mitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2,512.646
5
2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Electricity
Unmitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2,512.646
5
2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
7
1,383.426
7
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
7
1,383.426
7
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 31 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
408494 2.2000e-
003
0.0188 8.0100e-
003
1.2000e-
004
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
0.0000 21.7988 21.7988 4.2000e-
004
4.0000e-
004
21.9284
Apartments Mid
Rise
1.30613e
+007
0.0704 0.6018 0.2561 3.8400e-
003
0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 696.9989 696.9989 0.0134 0.0128 701.1408
General Office
Building
468450 2.5300e-
003
0.0230 0.0193 1.4000e-
004
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
0.0000 24.9983 24.9983 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1468
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
8.30736e
+006
0.0448 0.4072 0.3421 2.4400e-
003
0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 443.3124 443.3124 8.5000e-
003
8.1300e-
003
445.9468
Hotel 1.74095e
+006
9.3900e-
003
0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
0.0000 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e-
003
1.7000e-
003
93.4557
Quality
Restaurant
1.84608e
+006
9.9500e-
003
0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e-
004
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e-
003
1.8100e-
003
99.0993
Regional
Shopping Center
91840 5.0000e-
004
4.5000e-
003
3.7800e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 4.9009 4.9009 9.0000e-
005
9.0000e-
005
4.9301
Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
8
1,383.426
8
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 32 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
408494 2.2000e-
003
0.0188 8.0100e-
003
1.2000e-
004
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
0.0000 21.7988 21.7988 4.2000e-
004
4.0000e-
004
21.9284
Apartments Mid
Rise
1.30613e
+007
0.0704 0.6018 0.2561 3.8400e-
003
0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 696.9989 696.9989 0.0134 0.0128 701.1408
General Office
Building
468450 2.5300e-
003
0.0230 0.0193 1.4000e-
004
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
0.0000 24.9983 24.9983 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1468
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
8.30736e
+006
0.0448 0.4072 0.3421 2.4400e-
003
0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 443.3124 443.3124 8.5000e-
003
8.1300e-
003
445.9468
Hotel 1.74095e
+006
9.3900e-
003
0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
0.0000 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e-
003
1.7000e-
003
93.4557
Quality
Restaurant
1.84608e
+006
9.9500e-
003
0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e-
004
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e-
003
1.8100e-
003
99.0993
Regional
Shopping Center
91840 5.0000e-
004
4.5000e-
003
3.7800e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 4.9009 4.9009 9.0000e-
005
9.0000e-
005
4.9301
Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
8
1,383.426
8
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 33 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
106010 33.7770 1.3900e-
003
2.9000e-
004
33.8978
Apartments Mid
Rise
3.94697e
+006
1,257.587
9
0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086
9
General Office
Building
584550 186.2502 7.6900e-
003
1.5900e-
003
186.9165
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
1.58904e
+006
506.3022 0.0209 4.3200e-
003
508.1135
Hotel 550308 175.3399 7.2400e-
003
1.5000e-
003
175.9672
Quality
Restaurant
353120 112.5116 4.6500e-
003
9.6000e-
004
112.9141
Regional
Shopping Center
756000 240.8778 9.9400e-
003
2.0600e-
003
241.7395
Total 2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 34 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
106010 33.7770 1.3900e-
003
2.9000e-
004
33.8978
Apartments Mid
Rise
3.94697e
+006
1,257.587
9
0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086
9
General Office
Building
584550 186.2502 7.6900e-
003
1.5900e-
003
186.9165
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
1.58904e
+006
506.3022 0.0209 4.3200e-
003
508.1135
Hotel 550308 175.3399 7.2400e-
003
1.5000e-
003
175.9672
Quality
Restaurant
353120 112.5116 4.6500e-
003
9.6000e-
004
112.9141
Regional
Shopping Center
756000 240.8778 9.9400e-
003
2.0600e-
003
241.7395
Total 2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 35 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Unmitigated 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
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
0.4137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
4.3998 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0206 0.1763 0.0750 1.1200e-
003
0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0 0000 204.1166 204.1166 3.9100e-
003
3.7400e-
003
205.3295
Landscaping 0.3096 0.1187 10.3054 5.4000e-
004
0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0 0000 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540
Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 36 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
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
0.4137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
4.3998 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0206 0.1763 0.0750 1.1200e-
003
0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0 0000 204.1166 204.1166 3.9100e-
003
3.7400e-
003
205.3295
Landscaping 0.3096 0.1187 10.3054 5.4000e-
004
0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0 0000 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540
Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 37 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 585.8052 3 0183 0.0755 683.7567
Unmitigated 585.8052 3 0183 0.0755 683.7567
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 38 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
1.62885 /
1.02688
10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e-
003
12.6471
Apartments Mid
Rise
63.5252 /
40.0485
425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363
General Office
Building
7.99802 /
4.90201
53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e-
003
61.6019
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
10.9272 /
0.697482
51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e-
003
62.8482
Hotel 1.26834 /
0.140927
6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e-
003
7.5079
Quality
Restaurant
2.42827 /
0.154996
11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e-
003
13.9663
Regional
Shopping Center
4.14806 /
2.54236
27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e-
003
31.9490
Total 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 39 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.62885 /
1.02688
10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e-
003
12.6471
Apartments Mid
Rise
63.5252 /
40.0485
425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363
General Office
Building
7.99802 /
4.90201
53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e-
003
61.6019
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
10.9272 /
0.697482
51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e-
003
62.8482
Hotel 1.26834 /
0.140927
6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e-
003
7.5079
Quality
Restaurant
2.42827 /
0.154996
11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e-
003
13.9663
Regional
Shopping Center
4.14806 /
2.54236
27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e-
003
31.9490
Total 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Mitigated
8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 40 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Unmitigated 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 41 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
11.5 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834
Apartments Mid
Rise
448.5 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 225.5513
General Office
Building
41.85 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 21.0464
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
428.4 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430
Hotel 27.38 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 13.7694
Quality
Restaurant
7.3 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712
Regional
Shopping Center
58.8 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706
Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 42 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
11.5 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834
Apartments Mid
Rise
448.5 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 225.5513
General Office
Building
41.85 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 21.0464
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
428.4 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430
Hotel 27.38 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 13.7694
Quality
Restaurant
7.3 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712
Regional
Shopping Center
58.8 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706
Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Mitigated
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
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 43 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
11.0 Vegetation
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 44 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0
Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72
Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789
Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 1 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Trips and VMT - Local hire provision
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 2 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 3 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2561 46.4415 31.4494 0 0636 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0 0000 6,163.416
6
6,163.416
6
1.9475 0.0000 6,212.103
9
2022 4.5441 38.8811 40.8776 0.1240 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0 0000 12,493.44
03
12,493.44
03
1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57
07
2023 4.1534 25.7658 38.7457 0.1206 7.0088 0.7592 7.7679 1.8799 0.7136 2.5935 0 0000 12,150.48
90
12,150.48
90
0.9589 0.0000 12,174.46
15
2024 237.0219 9 5478 14.9642 0 0239 1.2171 0.4694 1.2875 0.3229 0.4319 0.4621 0 0000 2,313.180
8
2,313.180
8
0.7166 0.0000 2,331.095
6
Maximum 237.0219 46.4415 40.8776 0.1240 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 12,493.44
03
12,493.44
03
1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57
07
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 4 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2561 46.4415 31.4494 0 0636 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0 0000 6,163.416
6
6,163.416
6
1.9475 0.0000 6,212.103
9
2022 4.5441 38.8811 40.8776 0.1240 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0 0000 12,493.44
03
12,493.44
03
1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57
07
2023 4.1534 25.7658 38.7457 0.1206 7.0088 0.7592 7.7679 1.8799 0.7136 2.5935 0 0000 12,150.48
90
12,150.48
90
0.9589 0.0000 12,174.46
15
2024 237.0219 9 5478 14.9642 0 0239 1.2171 0.4694 1.2875 0.3229 0.4319 0.4621 0 0000 2,313.180
8
2,313.180
8
0.7166 0.0000 2,331.095
5
Maximum 237.0219 46.4415 40.8776 0.1240 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 12,493.44
03
12,493.44
03
1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57
07
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 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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 5 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Total 41.1168 67.2262 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18
16
76,811.18
16
2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87
86
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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Total 41.1168 67.2262 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18
16
76,811.18
16
2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87
86
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 6 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
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
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 0.00
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 7 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 8 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 9 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241
3
1,292.241
3
0.0877 1,294.433
7
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 0.0487 0.0313 0.4282 1.1800e-
003
0.1141 9.5000e-
004
0.1151 0.0303 8.8000e-
004
0.0311 117.2799 117 2799 3.5200e-
003
117.3678
Total 0.1760 4.1265 1.3884 0.0131 0.3810 0.0135 0.3946 0.1034 0.0129 0.1163 1,409.521
2
1,409.521
2
0.0912 1,411.801
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
Fugitive Dust 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 10 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241
3
1,292.241
3
0.0877 1,294.433
7
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 0.0487 0.0313 0.4282 1.1800e-
003
0.1141 9.5000e-
004
0.1151 0.0303 8.8000e-
004
0.0311 117.2799 117 2799 3.5200e-
003
117.3678
Total 0.1760 4.1265 1.3884 0.0131 0.3810 0.0135 0.3946 0.1034 0.0129 0.1163 1,409.521
2
1,409.521
2
0.0912 1,411.801
5
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 11 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0584 0.0375 0.5139 1.4100e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e-
003
140.8414
Total 0.0584 0.0375 0.5139 1.4100e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e-
003
140.8414
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 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 12 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0584 0.0375 0.5139 1.4100e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e-
003
140.8414
Total 0.0584 0.0375 0.5139 1.4100e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e-
003
140.8414
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 13 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0649 0.0417 0.5710 1 5700e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 156.3732 156 3732 4.6900e-
003
156.4904
Total 0.0649 0.0417 0.5710 1.5700e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 156.3732 156.3732 4.6900e-
003
156.4904
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 14 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0649 0.0417 0.5710 1 5700e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 156.3732 156 3732 4.6900e-
003
156.4904
Total 0.0649 0.0417 0.5710 1.5700e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 156.3732 156.3732 4.6900e-
003
156.4904
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 15 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0607 0.0376 0.5263 1 5100e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 150.8754 150 8754 4.2400e-
003
150.9813
Total 0.0607 0.0376 0.5263 1.5100e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 150.8754 150.8754 4.2400e-
003
150.9813
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 16 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0607 0.0376 0.5263 1 5100e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 150.8754 150 8754 4.2400e-
003
150.9813
Total 0.0607 0.0376 0.5263 1.5100e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 150.8754 150.8754 4.2400e-
003
150.9813
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 17 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4079 13 2032 3.4341 0.0364 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548
2
3,896.548
2
0.2236 3,902.138
4
Worker 2.4299 1.5074 21.0801 0.0607 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 6,042.558
5
6,042.558
5
0.1697 6,046.800
0
Total 2.8378 14.7106 24.5142 0.0971 7.0087 0.0741 7.0828 1.8799 0.0691 1.9490 9,939.106
7
9,939.106
7
0.3933 9,948.938
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 18 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4079 13 2032 3.4341 0.0364 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548
2
3,896.548
2
0.2236 3,902.138
4
Worker 2.4299 1.5074 21.0801 0.0607 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 6,042.558
5
6,042.558
5
0.1697 6,046.800
0
Total 2.8378 14.7106 24.5142 0.0971 7.0087 0.0741 7.0828 1.8799 0.0691 1.9490 9,939.106
7
9,939.106
7
0.3933 9,948.938
4
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 19 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3027 10 0181 3.1014 0.0352 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 3,773.876
2
3,773.876
2
0.1982 3,778.830
0
Worker 2.2780 1.3628 19.4002 0.0584 6.0932 0.0479 6.1411 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 5,821.402
8
5,821.402
8
0.1529 5,825.225
4
Total 2.5807 11.3809 22.5017 0.0936 7.0088 0.0595 7.0682 1.8799 0.0552 1.9350 9,595.279
0
9,595.279
0
0.3511 9,604.055
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 20 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3027 10 0181 3.1014 0.0352 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 3,773.876
2
3,773.876
2
0.1982 3,778.830
0
Worker 2.2780 1.3628 19.4002 0.0584 6.0932 0.0479 6.1411 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 5,821.402
8
5,821.402
8
0.1529 5,825.225
4
Total 2.5807 11.3809 22.5017 0.0936 7.0088 0.0595 7.0682 1.8799 0.0552 1.9350 9,595.279
0
9,595.279
0
0.3511 9,604.055
4
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 21 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0427 0.0255 0.3633 1 0900e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 109.0150 109 0150 2.8600e-
003
109.0866
Total 0.0427 0.0255 0.3633 1.0900e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 109.0150 109.0150 2.8600e-
003
109.0866
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 22 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0427 0.0255 0.3633 1 0900e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 109.0150 109 0150 2.8600e-
003
109.0866
Total 0.0427 0.0255 0.3633 1.0900e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 109.0150 109.0150 2.8600e-
003
109.0866
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 23 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0403 0.0233 0.3384 1 0600e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e-
003
105.6992
Total 0.0403 0.0233 0.3384 1.0600e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e-
003
105.6992
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 24 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0403 0.0233 0.3384 1 0600e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e-
003
105.6992
Total 0.0403 0.0233 0.3384 1.0600e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e-
003
105.6992
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 25 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.4296 0.2481 3.6098 0.0113 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,126.758
3
1,126.758
3
0.0280 1,127.458
3
Total 0.4296 0.2481 3.6098 0.0113 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,126.758
3
1,126.758
3
0.0280 1,127.458
3
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 26 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.4296 0.2481 3.6098 0.0113 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,126.758
3
1,126.758
3
0.0280 1,127.458
3
Total 0.4296 0.2481 3.6098 0.0113 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,126.758
3
1,126.758
3
0.0280 1,127.458
3
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 27 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Unmitigated 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 28 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 29 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 30 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
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
Apartments Low
Rise
1119.16 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35784.3 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1283.42 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22759.9 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4769.72 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5057.75 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
251.616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 31 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.11916 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35.7843 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1.28342 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22.7599 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4.76972 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5.05775 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
0.251616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 32 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 33 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste 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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 34 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
11.0 Vegetation
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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 35 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0
Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72
Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789
Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 1 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Trips and VMT - Local hire provision
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 2 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 3 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2621 46.4460 31.4068 0 0635 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0 0000 6,154.337
7
6,154.337
7
1.9472 0.0000 6,203.018
6
2022 4.7966 38.8851 39.6338 0.1195 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0 0000 12,035.34
40
12,035.34
40
1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60
13
2023 4.3939 25.8648 37.5031 0.1162 7.0088 0.7598 7.7685 1.8799 0.7142 2.5940 0 0000 11,710.40
80
11,710.40
80
0.9617 0.0000 11,734.44
97
2024 237.0656 9 5503 14.9372 0 0238 1.2171 0.4694 1.2875 0.3229 0.4319 0.4621 0 0000 2,307.051
7
2,307.051
7
0.7164 0.0000 2,324.962
7
Maximum 237.0656 46.4460 39.6338 0.1195 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 12,035.34
40
12,035.34
40
1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60
13
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 4 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2621 46.4460 31.4068 0 0635 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0 0000 6,154.337
7
6,154.337
7
1.9472 0.0000 6,203.018
6
2022 4.7966 38.8851 39.6338 0.1195 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0 0000 12,035.34
40
12,035.34
40
1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60
13
2023 4.3939 25.8648 37.5031 0.1162 7.0088 0.7598 7.7685 1.8799 0.7142 2.5940 0 0000 11,710.40
80
11,710.40
80
0.9617 0.0000 11,734.44
97
2024 237.0656 9 5503 14.9372 0 0238 1.2171 0.4694 1.2875 0.3229 0.4319 0.4621 0 0000 2,307.051
7
2,307.051
7
0.7164 0.0000 2,324.962
7
Maximum 237.0656 46.4460 39.6338 0.1195 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 12,035.34
40
12,035.34
40
1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60
13
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 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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 5 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.5233 45.9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Total 40.7912 67.7872 202.7424 0.6043 45.9592 2.4640 48.4231 12.2950 2.4399 14.7349 0.0000 74,422.37
87
74,422.37
87
2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44
17
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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.5233 45.9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Total 40.7912 67.7872 202.7424 0.6043 45.9592 2.4640 48.4231 12.2950 2.4399 14.7349 0.0000 74,422.37
87
74,422.37
87
2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44
17
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 6 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
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
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 0.00
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 7 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 8 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 9 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855
5
1,269.855
5
0.0908 1,272.125
2
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 0.0532 0.0346 0.3963 1.1100e-
003
0.1141 9.5000e-
004
0.1151 0.0303 8.8000e-
004
0.0311 110.4707 110.4707 3.3300e-
003
110.5539
Total 0.1835 4.1800 1.4144 0.0128 0.3810 0.0137 0.3948 0.1034 0.0131 0.1165 1,380.326
2
1,380.326
2
0.0941 1,382.679
1
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 10 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855
5
1,269.855
5
0.0908 1,272.125
2
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 0.0532 0.0346 0.3963 1.1100e-
003
0.1141 9.5000e-
004
0.1151 0.0303 8.8000e-
004
0.0311 110.4707 110.4707 3.3300e-
003
110.5539
Total 0.1835 4.1800 1.4144 0.0128 0.3810 0.0137 0.3948 0.1034 0.0131 0.1165 1,380.326
2
1,380.326
2
0.0941 1,382.679
1
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 11 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0638 0.0415 0.4755 1 3300e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 132.5649 132 5649 3.9900e-
003
132.6646
Total 0.0638 0.0415 0.4755 1.3300e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 132.5649 132.5649 3.9900e-
003
132.6646
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 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 12 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0638 0.0415 0.4755 1 3300e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 132.5649 132 5649 3.9900e-
003
132.6646
Total 0.0638 0.0415 0.4755 1.3300e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 132.5649 132.5649 3.9900e-
003
132.6646
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 13 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0709 0.0462 0.5284 1.4800e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 147.2943 147 2943 4.4300e-
003
147.4051
Total 0.0709 0.0462 0.5284 1.4800e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 147.2943 147.2943 4.4300e-
003
147.4051
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 14 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0709 0.0462 0.5284 1.4800e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 147.2943 147 2943 4.4300e-
003
147.4051
Total 0.0709 0.0462 0.5284 1.4800e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 147.2943 147.2943 4.4300e-
003
147.4051
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 15 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0665 0.0416 0.4861 1.4300e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.0000e-
003
142.2207
Total 0.0665 0.0416 0.4861 1.4300e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.0000e-
003
142.2207
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 16 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0665 0.0416 0.4861 1.4300e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.0000e-
003
142.2207
Total 0.0665 0.0416 0.4861 1.4300e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.0000e-
003
142.2207
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 17 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4284 13.1673 3.8005 0.0354 0.9155 0.0256 0.9412 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075
0
3,789.075
0
0.2381 3,795.028
3
Worker 2.6620 1.6677 19.4699 0.0571 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 5,691.935
4
5,691.935
4
0.1602 5,695.940
8
Total 3.0904 14.8350 23.2704 0.0926 7.0087 0.0749 7.0836 1.8799 0.0699 1.9498 9,481.010
4
9,481.010
4
0.3984 9,490.969
1
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 18 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4284 13.1673 3.8005 0.0354 0.9155 0.0256 0.9412 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075
0
3,789.075
0
0.2381 3,795.028
3
Worker 2.6620 1.6677 19.4699 0.0571 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 5,691.935
4
5,691.935
4
0.1602 5,695.940
8
Total 3.0904 14.8350 23.2704 0.0926 7.0087 0.0749 7.0836 1.8799 0.0699 1.9498 9,481.010
4
9,481.010
4
0.3984 9,490.969
1
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 19 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3183 9.9726 3.3771 0.0343 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 3,671.400
7
3,671.400
7
0.2096 3,676.641
7
Worker 2.5029 1.5073 17.8820 0.0550 6.0932 0.0479 6.1411 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 5,483.797
4
5,483.797
4
0.1442 5,487.402
0
Total 2.8211 11.4799 21.2591 0.0893 7.0088 0.0601 7.0688 1.8799 0.0557 1.9356 9,155.198
1
9,155.198
1
0.3538 9,164.043
7
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 20 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3183 9.9726 3.3771 0.0343 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 3,671.400
7
3,671.400
7
0.2096 3,676.641
7
Worker 2.5029 1.5073 17.8820 0.0550 6.0932 0.0479 6.1411 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 5,483.797
4
5,483.797
4
0.1442 5,487.402
0
Total 2.8211 11.4799 21.2591 0.0893 7.0088 0.0601 7.0688 1.8799 0.0557 1.9356 9,155.198
1
9,155.198
1
0.3538 9,164.043
7
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 21 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0469 0.0282 0.3349 1 0300e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e-
003
102.7603
Total 0.0469 0.0282 0.3349 1.0300e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e-
003
102.7603
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 22 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0469 0.0282 0.3349 1 0300e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e-
003
102.7603
Total 0.0469 0.0282 0.3349 1.0300e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e-
003
102.7603
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 23 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1 0000e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e-
003
99.5663
Total 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1.0000e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e-
003
99.5663
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 24 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1 0000e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e-
003
99.5663
Total 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1.0000e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e-
003
99.5663
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 25 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.4734 0.2743 3.3220 0.0107 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,061.381
8
1,061.381
8
0.0264 1,062.041
0
Total 0.4734 0.2743 3.3220 0.0107 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,061.381
8
1,061.381
8
0.0264 1,062.041
0
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 26 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.4734 0.2743 3.3220 0.0107 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,061.381
8
1,061.381
8
0.0264 1,062.041
0
Total 0.4734 0.2743 3.3220 0.0107 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,061.381
8
1,061.381
8
0.0264 1,062.041
0
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 27 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 9.5233 45 9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Unmitigated 9.5233 45 9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 28 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 29 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 30 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
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
Apartments Low
Rise
1119.16 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35784.3 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1283.42 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22759.9 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4769.72 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5057.75 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
251.616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 31 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.11916 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35.7843 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1.28342 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22.7599 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4.76972 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5.05775 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
0.251616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 32 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 33 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste 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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 34 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
11.0 Vegetation
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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 35 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e)3,623
Amortized (MT CO2e/year) 120.77
Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e)3,024
Amortized (MT CO2e/year) 100.80
% Decrease in Construction-related GHG Emissions 17%
Local Hire Provision Net Change
With Local Hire Provision
Without Local Hire Provision
Attachment C
EXHIBIT B
SOIL WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, California 90405
Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
Mobil: (310) 795-2335
Office: (310) 452-5555
Fax: (310) 452-5550
Email: prosenfeld@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 1 of 10 June 2019
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling
Principal Environmental Chemist Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist
Education
Ph.D. Soil Chemistry, University of Washington, 1999. Dissertation on volatile organic compound filtration.
M.S. Environmental Science, U.C. Berkeley, 1995. Thesis on organic waste economics.
B.A. Environmental Studies, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1991. Thesis on wastewater treatment.
Professional Experience
Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years’ experience conducting environmental investigations and risk assessments for
evaluating impacts to human health, property, and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and
transport of environmental contaminants, human health risk, exposure assessment, and ecological restoration. Dr.
Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from unconventional oil drilling operations, oil spills, landfills,
boilers and incinerators, process stacks, storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, and many other industrial
and agricultural sources. His project experience ranges from monitoring and modeling of pollution sources to
evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at industrial facilities and residents in surrounding communities.
Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk assessments for contaminated sites
containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria, particulate matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents,
pesticides, radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs, PAHs, perchlorate,
asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS), unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates (MTBE), among
other pollutants. Dr. Rosenfeld also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from various projects and is
an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as the evaluation of odor nuisance
impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous emissions. As a principal scientist at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld
directs air dispersion modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert witness and testified about
pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at dozens of sites and has testified as an expert witness on
more than ten cases involving exposure to air contaminants from industrial sources.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 10 June 2019
Professional History:
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner
UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher)
UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor
UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator
UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate
Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist
National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor
Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager
Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager
Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 – 2000; Risk Assessor
King County, Seattle, 1996 – 1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist
Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist
Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist
Publications:
Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil
Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48
Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property
Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342
Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C.,
(2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated
Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632.
Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks of Hazardous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and
Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL.
Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113–125.
Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and
Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal
of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living
near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air
Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 10 June 2019
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid
Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two
Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255.
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins
And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527-
000530.
Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near
a Former Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197.
Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for
Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357.
Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater,
Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344.
Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food,
Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science
and Technology. 49(9),171-178.
Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor-Quality-Wheel Classification Scheme
For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation’s Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC)
2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities,
and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science
and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from
Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using
High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management
Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS–6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water
Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal
of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor
emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research. 73(4), 363-367.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and
Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor.
Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 10 June 2019
Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and
distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users
Network, 7(1).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids
Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters
thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third
World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California.
Presentations:
Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile
organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American
Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA.
Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.;
Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water.
Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse,
R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis,
Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS)
Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United
States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting, Lecture conducted
from Tuscon, AZ.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United
States” Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the
United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture
conducted from Tuscon, AZ.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in
populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air
Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and
Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing
Facility. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from
University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium-Contaminated Water Into A
Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23rd Annual International
Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst
MA.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 10 June 2019
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment
Facility Emissions. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted
from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3-
Trichloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting . Lecture
conducted from San Diego, CA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAH, and Metal Exposure in Florala,
Alabama. The AEHS Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 – 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on
Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants – DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia
Hotel in Oslo Norway.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. APHA 134 Annual Meeting &
Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
Mealey’s C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel,
Philadelphia, PA.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton
Hotel, Irvine California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA
Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey’s Groundwater
Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from
Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related
Perfluorochemicals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Law Conference.
Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water and
Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability
and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundwater Association. Environmental
Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust.
Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona.
Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River.
Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 10 June 2019
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners.
Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento,
California.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh
International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical
Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus
Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California
CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA
Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and
Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water
Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.
Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association . Lecture
conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 11-14, 2002). Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a
Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from
Indianapolis, Maryland.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Water
Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted
from Ocean Shores, California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery
Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil
Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from
Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldwell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from
Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 10 June 2019
Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three
Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim
California.
Teaching Experience:
UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science
100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on
the health effects of environmental contaminants.
National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Sante Fe, New
Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage
tanks.
National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1,
2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.
California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San
Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.
UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation
Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.
University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry,
Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.
U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.
Academic Grants Awarded:
California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.
Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.
Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.
Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.
King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of
Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on
VOC emissions. 1998.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of
polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.
James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered
Poplar trees with resistance to round-up. 1996.
United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the
Tahoe National Forest. 1995.
Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts
in West Indies. 1993
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 10 June 2019
Deposition and/or Trial Testimony:
In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey
Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant.
Case No.: 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition. 6-7-2019
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division
M/T Carla Maersk, Plaintiffs, vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS “Conti Perdido”
Defendant.
Case No.: 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237
Rosenfeld Deposition. 5-9-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
Carole-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC615636
Rosenfeld Deposition, 1-26-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC646857
Rosenfeld Deposition, 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19
In United States District Court For The District of Colorado
Bells et al. Plaintiff vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants
Case: No 1:16-cv-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition, 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018
In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 112th Judicial District
Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants
Cause No 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-17-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa
Simons et al., Plaintiffs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants
Cause No C12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-20-2017
In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois
Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-23-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles
Warrn Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC
Case No.: LC102019 (c/w BC582154)
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018
In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division
Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2017
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 10 June 2019
In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish
Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 13-2-03987-5
Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017
Trial, March 2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda
Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants
Case No.: RG14711115
Rosenfeld Deposition, September 2015
In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants
Case No.: LALA002187
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Jerry Dovico, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Valley View Sine LLC, et al., Defendants
Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Doug Pauls, et al.,, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Richard Warren, et al., Defendants
Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia
Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al.
Civil Action N0. 14-C-30000
Rosenfeld Deposition, June 2015
In The Third Judicial District County of Dona Ana, New Mexico
Betty Gonzalez, et al. Plaintiffs vs. Del Oro Dairy, Del Oro Real Estate LLC, Jerry Settles and Deward
DeRuyter, Defendants
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Muscatine County
Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant
Case No 4980
Rosenfeld Deposition: May 2015
In the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida
Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant.
Case Number CACE07030358 (26)
Rosenfeld Deposition: December 2014
In the United States District Court Western District of Oklahoma
Tommy McCarty, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Oklahoma City Landfill, LLC d/b/a Southeast Oklahoma City
Landfill, et al. Defendants.
Case No. 5:12-cv-01152-C
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2014
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 10 June 2019
In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.
Case Number cc-11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987)
Rosenfeld Deposition: October 2012
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division
Kyle Cannon, Eugene Donovan, Genaro Ramirez, Carol Sassler, and Harvey Walton, each Individually and
on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. BP Products North America, Inc., Defendant.
Case 3:10-cv-00622
Rosenfeld Deposition: February 2012
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2013
In the Circuit Court of Baltimore County Maryland
Philip E. Cvach, II et al., Plaintiffs vs. Two Farms, Inc. d/b/a Royal Farms, Defendants
Case Number: 03-C-12-012487 OT
Rosenfeld Deposition: September 2013
EXHIBIT C
1640 5th St.., Suite 204 Santa
Santa Monica, California 90401
Tel: (949) 887‐9013
Email: mhagemann@swape.com
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
CEQA Review
Education:
M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984.
B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 1982.
Professional Certifications:
California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:
Matt has 25 years of experience in environmental policy, assessment and remediation. He spent nine
years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science
Policy Advisor in the Western Regional Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from
perchlorate and MTBE. While with EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of
the assessment of seven major military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement
actions under provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) while also working
with permit holders to improve hydrogeologic characterization and water quality monitoring.
Matt has worked closely with U.S. EPA legal counsel and the technical staff of several states in the
application and enforcement of RCRA, Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act regulations. Matt
has trained the technical staff in the States of California, Hawaii, Nevada, Arizona and the Territory of
Guam in the conduct of investigations, groundwater fundamentals, and sampling techniques.
Positions Matt has held include:
•Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 – present);
•Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 – 2014;
•Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 ‐‐ 2003);
• Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001 – 2004);
• Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989–
1998);
• Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 – 2000);
• Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 –
1998);
• Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990 – 1995);
• Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986 – 1998); and
• Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984 – 1986).
Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:
With SWAPE, Matt’s responsibilities have included:
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 100 environmental impact reports
since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard to hazardous waste, water
resources, water quality, air quality, Valley Fever, greenhouse gas emissions, and geologic
hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead agencies at the
local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks and
implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from toxins
and Valley Fever.
• Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at industrial facilities.
• Manager of a project to provide technical assistance to a community adjacent to a former
Naval shipyard under a grant from the U.S. EPA.
• Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns.
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications
for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission.
• Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S.
• Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in
Southern California drinking water wells.
• Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the
review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas
stations throughout California.
• Expert witness on two cases involving MTBE litigation.
• Expert witness and litigation support on the impact of air toxins and hazards at a school.
• Expert witness in litigation at a former plywood plant.
With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt’s duties included the following:
• Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony
by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking
water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony
against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies.
• Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by
MTBE in California and New York.
2
• Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production‐related contamination in Mississippi.
• Lead author for a multi‐volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los
Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines.
3
• Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with
clients and regulators.
Executive Director:
As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange
County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of
wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange
County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection
of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the
development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the
discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including
Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business
institutions including the Orange County Business Council.
Hydrogeology:
As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to
characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point
Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army
Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
• Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of
monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and
groundwater.
• Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory
analysis at military bases.
• Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation
development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.
At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of
groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to
show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and
County of Maui.
As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the
Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included
the following:
• Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for
the protection of drinking water.
• Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities
through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports,
conducted public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very
concerned about the impact of designation.
4
• Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments,
including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water
transfer.
Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
• Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance
with Subtitle C requirements.
• Reviewed and wrote ʺpart Bʺ permits for the disposal of hazardous waste.
• Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed
the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.
EPA legal counsel.
• Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor’s investigations of waste sites.
With the National Park Service, Matt directed service‐wide investigations of contaminant sources to
prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
• Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the
Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants.
• Conducted watershed‐scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and
Olympic National Park.
• Identified high‐levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico
and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA.
• Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a
national workgroup.
• Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while
serving on a national workgroup.
• Co‐authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal
watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation‐
wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks.
• Contributed to the Federal Multi‐Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water
Action Plan.
Policy:
Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 9. Activities included the following:
• Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the
potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking
water supplies.
• Shaped EPA’s national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing
to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in
Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
• Improved the technical training of EPAʹs scientific and engineering staff.
• Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region’s 300 scientists and engineers in
negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific
principles into the policy‐making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents.
5
Geology:
With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for
timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
• Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical
models to determine slope stability.
• Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource
protection.
• Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the
city of Medford, Oregon.
As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later
listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern
Oregon. Duties included the following:
• Supervised year‐long effort for soil and groundwater sampling.
• Conducted aquifer tests.
• Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.
Teaching:
From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university
levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in
environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater
contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students.
• Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.
Matt taught physical geology (lecture and lab and introductory geology at Golden West College in
Huntington Beach, California from 2010 to 2014.
Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public
Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.
EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.
Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and
Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las
Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at
schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.
6
Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE
Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.
Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater
Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust,
Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy
of Sciences, Irvine, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water
Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter‐Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.
Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited
presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of
the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a
meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address
Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental
Journalists.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater
(and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage
Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and
State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished
report.
7
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.
Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks. Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential Water Quality Concerns Related
to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft
Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright
Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.
Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air
Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.
Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic
Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui,
October 1996.
Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu,
Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air
and Waste Management Association Publication VIP‐61.
Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Characterization and Cleanup a t Closing Military Bases
in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater
Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of
Groundwater.
Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL‐
contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
8
Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of
Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.
Other Experience:
Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examination, 2009‐
2011.
9
EXHIBIT D
P: (626) 381-9248
F: (626) 389-5414
E: info@mitchtsailaw.com
Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorney At Law
155 South El Molino Avenue
Suite 104
Pasadena, California 91101
VIA E-MAIL
August 5, 2021
Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253
Em: consultingplanner@laquintaca.gov
RE: Coral Mountain Resort (SCH #2021020310) – Comments on Draft
Environmental Impact Report
Dear Nucole Sauviat Criste,
On behalf of the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (“Commenters” or
“Southwest Carpenters”), my Office is submitting these comments on the City of
La Quinta’s (“City” or “Lead Agency”) Draft Environmental Impact Report
(“DEIR”) (SCH No. 2021020310) for the proposed Coral Mountain Resort Project
(“Project”).
The City proposes to adopt the Project, carving out 386 acres of a 929-acre area of
the City, to promote future development of the Coral Mountain Resort. The Project
would allow for the development of 600 residential units, a 150-room resort hotel
plus complementary uses and amenities, a recreational surf facility, 57,000 square feet
of commercial development, 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses,
and 23.6 acres of recreational uses. As part of the Project, the City would initiate a
general plan amendment and zoning change to designate the Project area for “Tourist
Commercial” uses; a specific plan amendment to exclude the Project area from a
previous specific plan; the adoption of the Project’s specific plan; the adoption of a
tentative tract map; site development permits; and the adoption of a development
agreement with the Project applicant.
The Southwest Carpenters is a labor union representing more than 50,000 union
carpenters in six states and has a strong interest in well ordered land use planning and
addressing the environmental impacts of development projects.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 2 of 33
Individual members of the Southwest Carpenters live, work, and recreate in the City
and surrounding communities and would be directly affected by the Project’s
environmental impacts.
Commenters expressly reserve the right to supplement these comments at or prior to
hearings on the Project, and at any later hearings and proceedings related to this
Project. Cal. Gov. Code § 65009(b); Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21177(a); Bakersfield Citizens
for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 1184, 1199-1203; see Galante
Vineyards v. Monterey Water Dist. (1997) 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121.
Commenters incorporate by reference all comments raising issues regarding the EIR
submitted prior to certification of the EIR for the Project. Citizens for Clean Energy v
City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal. App. 4th 173, 191 (finding that any party who has
objected to the Project’s environmental documentation may assert any issue timely
raised by other parties).
Moreover, Commenters request that the Lead Agency provide notice for any and all
notices referring or related to the Project issued under the California Environmental
Quality Act (“CEQA”), Cal Public Resources Code (“PRC”) § 21000 et seq, and the
California Planning and Zoning Law (“Planning and Zoning Law”), Cal. Gov’t
Code §§ 65000–65010. California Public Resources Code Sections 21092.2, and
21167(f) and Government Code Section 65092 require agencies to mail such notices
to any person who has filed a written request for them with the clerk of the agency’s
governing body.
The City should require the Applicant provide additional community benefits such as
requiring local hire and use of a skilled and trained workforce to build the Project.
The City should require the use of workers who have graduated from a Joint Labor
Management apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California, or
have at least as many hours of on-the-job experience in the applicable craft which
would be required to graduate from such a state approved apprenticeship training
program or who are registered apprentices in an apprenticeship training program
approved by the State of California.
Community benefits such as local hire and skilled and trained workforce requirements
can also be helpful to reduce environmental impacts and improve the positive
economic impact of the Project. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain
percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 3 of 33
length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized
economic benefits. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of
workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of
vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic
benefits. As environmental consultants Matt Hagemann and Paul E. Rosenfeld note:
[A]ny local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length
from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of
construction-related GHG emissions, though the significance of the
reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the
project site.
March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and
Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling.
Skilled and trained workforce requirements promote the development of skilled trades
that yield sustainable economic development. As the California Workforce
Development Board and the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
concluded:
. . . labor should be considered an investment rather than a cost – and
investments in growing, diversifying, and upskilling California’s workforce
can positively affect returns on climate mitigation efforts. In other words,
well trained workers are key to delivering emissions reductions and
moving California closer to its climate targets.1
Recently, on May 7, 2021, the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that
that the “[u]se of a local state-certified apprenticeship program or a skilled and trained
workforce with a local hire component” can result in air pollutant reductions.2
Cities are increasingly adopting local skilled and trained workforce policies and
requirements into general plans and municipal codes. For example, the City of
Hayward 2040 General Plan requires the City to “promote local hiring . . . to help
1 California Workforce Development Board (2020) Putting California on the High Road: A Jobs and Climate Action
Plan for 2030 at p. ii, available at https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Putting-California-on-
the-High-Road.pdf
2 South Coast Air Quality Management District (May 7, 2021) Certify Final Environmental Assessment and Adopt
Proposed Rule 2305 – Warehouse Indirect Source Rule – Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions
Program, and Proposed Rule 316 – Fees for Rule 2305, Submit Rule 2305 for Inclusion Into the SIP, and Approve
Supporting Budget Actions, available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/Governing-
Board/2021/2021-May7-027.pdf?sfvrsn=10
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 4 of 33
achieve a more positive jobs-housing balance, and reduce regional commuting, gas
consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions.”3
In fact, the City of Hayward has gone as far as to adopt a Skilled Labor Force policy
into its Downtown Specific Plan and municipal code, requiring developments in its
Downtown area to requiring that the City “[c]ontribute to the stabilization of regional
construction markets by spurring applicants of housing and nonresidential
developments to require contractors to utilize apprentices from state-approved, joint
labor-management training programs, . . .”4 In addition, the City of Hayward requires
all projects 30,000 square feet or larger to “utilize apprentices from state-approved,
joint labor-management training programs.”5
Locating jobs closer to residential areas can have significant environmental benefits.
As the California Planning Roundtable noted in 2008:
People who live and work in the same jurisdiction would be more likely
to take transit, walk, or bicycle to work than residents of less balanced
communities and their vehicle trips would be shorter. Benefits would
include potential reductions in both vehicle miles traveled and vehicle
hours traveled.6
In addition, local hire mandates as well as skill training are critical facets of a strategy
to reduce vehicle miles traveled. As planning experts Robert Cervero and Michael
Duncan noted, simply placing jobs near housing stock is insufficient to achieve VMT
reductions since the skill requirements of available local jobs must be matched to
those held by local residents.7 Some municipalities have tied local hire and skilled and
trained workforce policies to local development permits to address transportation
issues. As Cervero and Duncan note:
In nearly built-out Berkeley, CA, the approach to balancing jobs and
housing is to create local jobs rather than to develop new housing.” The
3 City of Hayward (2014) Hayward 2040 General Plan Policy Document at p. 3-99, available at https://www.hayward-
ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/General Plan FINAL.pdf.
4 City of Hayward (2019) Hayward Downtown Specific Plan at p. 5-24, available at https://www.hayward-
ca.gov/sites/default/files/Hayward%20Downtown%
20Specific%20Plan.pdf.
5 City of Hayward Municipal Code, Chapter 10, § 28.5.3.020(C).
6 California Planning Roundtable (2008) Deconstructing Jobs-Housing Balance at p. 6, available at
https://cproundtable.org/static/media/uploads/publications/cpr-jobs-housing.pdf
7 Cervero, Robert and Duncan, Michael (2006) Which Reduces Vehicle Travel More: Jobs-Housing Balance or Retail-
Housing Mixing? Journal of the American Planning Association 72 (4), 475-490, 482, available at
http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/UTCT-825.pdf.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 5 of 33
city’s First Source program encourages businesses to hire local residents,
especially for entry- and intermediate-level jobs, and sponsors vocational
training to ensure residents are employment-ready. While the program is
voluntary, some 300 businesses have used it to date, placing more than
3,000 city residents in local jobs since it was launched in 1986. When
needed, these carrots are matched by sticks, since the city is not shy about
negotiating corporate participation in First Source as a condition of
approval for development permits.
The City should consider utilizing skilled and trained workforce policies and
requirements to benefit the local area economically and mitigate greenhouse gas, air
quality and transportation impacts.
The City should also require the Project to be built to standards exceeding the current
2019 California Green Building Code to mitigate the Project’s environmental impacts
and to advance progress towards the State of California’s environmental goals.
I. THE PROJECT WOULD BE APPROVED IN VIOLATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
A. Background Concerning the California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA has two basic purposes. First, CEQA is designed to inform decision makers
and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project. 14
California Code of Regulations (“CCR” or “CEQA Guidelines”) § 15002(a)(1).8 “Its
purpose is to inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental
consequences of their decisions before they are made. Thus, the EIR ‘protects not only
the environment but also informed self-government.’ [Citation.]” Citizens of Goleta
Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 553, 564. The EIR has been described as
“an environmental ‘alarm bell’ whose purpose it is to alert the public and its
responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached ecological
points of no return.” Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay v. Bd. of Port Comm’rs. (2001) 91 Cal.
App. 4th 1344, 1354 (“Berkeley Jets”); County of Inyo v. Yorty (1973) 32 Cal. App. 3d 795,
810.
8 The CEQA Guidelines, codified in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, section 150000 et seq, are regulatory
guidelines promulgated by the state Natural Resources Agency for the implementation of CEQA. (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §
21083.) The CEQA Guidelines are given “great weight in interpreting CEQA except when . . . clearly unauthorized or
erroneous.” Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal. 4th 204, 217.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 6 of 33
Second, CEQA directs public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage
when possible by requiring alternatives or mitigation measures. CEQA Guidelines §
15002(a)(2) and (3). See also, Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal. App. 4th 1344, 1354; Citizens of Goleta
Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553; Laurel Heights Improvement Ass’n v.
Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 400. The EIR serves to
provide public agencies and the public in general with information about the effect
that a proposed project is likely to have on the environment and to “identify ways that
environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced.” CEQA Guidelines §
15002(a)(2). If the project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may
approve the project only upon finding that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened
all significant effects on the environment where feasible” and that any unavoidable
significant effects on the environment are “acceptable due to overriding concerns”
specified in CEQA section 21081. CEQA Guidelines § 15092(b)(2)(A–B).
While the courts review an EIR using an “abuse of discretion” standard, “the
reviewing court is not to ‘uncritically rely on every study or analysis presented by a
project proponent in support of its position.’ A ‘clearly inadequate or unsupported
study is entitled to no judicial deference.’” Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1355
(emphasis added) (quoting Laurel Heights, 47 Cal.3d at 391, 409 fn. 12). Drawing this
line and determining whether the EIR complies with CEQA’s information disclosure
requirements presents a question of law subject to independent review by the courts.
Sierra Club v. Cnty. of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal. 5th 502, 515; Madera Oversight Coalition, Inc. v.
County of Madera (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 48, 102, 131. As the court stated in Berkeley
Jets, 91 Cal. App. 4th at 1355:
A prejudicial abuse of discretion occurs “if the failure to include relevant
information precludes informed decision-making and informed public
participation, thereby thwarting the statutory goals of the EIR process.
The preparation and circulation of an EIR is more than a set of technical hurdles for
agencies and developers to overcome. The EIR’s function is to ensure that
government officials who decide to build or approve a project do so with a full
understanding of the environmental consequences and, equally important, that the
public is assured those consequences have been considered. For the EIR to serve
these goals it must present information so that the foreseeable impacts of pursuing
the project can be understood and weighed, and the public must be given an adequate
opportunity to comment on that presentation before the decision to go forward is
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 7 of 33
made. Communities for a Better Environment v. Richmond (2010) 184 Cal. App. 4th 70, 80
(quoting Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007)
40 Cal.4th 412, 449–450).
B. CEQA Requires Revision and Recirculation of an Environmental Impact
Report When Substantial Changes or New Information Comes to Light
Section 21092.1 of the California Public Resources Code requires that “[w]hen
significant new information is added to an environmental impact report after notice
has been given pursuant to Section 21092 … but prior to certification, the public
agency shall give notice again pursuant to Section 21092, and consult again pursuant
to Sections 21104 and 21153 before certifying the environmental impact report” in
order to give the public a chance to review and comment upon the information.
CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5.
Significant new information includes “changes in the project or environmental
setting as well as additional data or other information” that “deprives the public of a
meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect
of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a
feasible project alternative).” CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5(a). Examples of significant
new information requiring recirculation include “new significant environmental
impacts from the project or from a new mitigation measure,” “substantial increase in
the severity of an environmental impact,” “feasible project alternative or mitigation
measure considerably different from others previously analyzed” as well as when “the
draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature
that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.” Id.
An agency has an obligation to recirculate an environmental impact report for public
notice and comment due to “significant new information” regardless of whether the
agency opts to include it in a project’s environmental impact report. Cadiz Land Co. v.
Rail Cycle (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 74, 95 [finding that in light of a new expert report
disclosing potentially significant impacts to groundwater supply “the EIR should have
been revised and recirculated for purposes of informing the public and governmental
agencies of the volume of groundwater at risk and to allow the public and
governmental agencies to respond to such information.”]. If significant new
information was brought to the attention of an agency prior to certification, an agency
is required to revise and recirculate that information as part of the environmental
impact report.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 8 of 33
C. Due to the COVID-19 Crisis, the City Must Adopt a Mandatory Finding
of Significance that the Project May Cause a Substantial Adverse Effect
on Human Beings and Mitigate COVID-19 Impacts
CEQA requires that an agency make a finding of significance when a Project may
cause a significant adverse effect on human beings. PRC § 21083(b)(3); CEQA
Guidelines § 15065(a)(4).
Public health risks related to construction work requires a mandatory finding of
significance under CEQA. Construction work has been defined as a Lower to High-
risk activity for COVID-19 spread by the Occupations Safety and Health
Administration. Recently, several construction sites have been identified as sources of
community spread of COVID-19.9
SWRCC recommends that the Lead Agency adopt additional CEQA mitigation
measures to mitigate public health risks from the Project’s construction activities.
SWRCC requests that the Lead Agency require safe on-site construction work
practices as well as training and certification for any construction workers on the
Project Site.
In particular, based upon SWRCC’s experience with safe construction site work
practices, SWRCC recommends that the Lead Agency require that while construction
activities are being conducted at the Project Site:
Construction Site Design:
• The Project Site will be limited to two controlled entry
points.
• Entry points will have temperature screening technicians
taking temperature readings when the entry point is open.
• The Temperature Screening Site Plan shows details
regarding access to the Project Site and Project Site logistics
for conducting temperature screening.
• A 48-hour advance notice will be provided to all trades prior
to the first day of temperature screening.
9 Santa Clara County Public Health (June 12, 2020) COVID-19 CASES AT CONSTRUCTION SITES HIGHLIGHT
NEED FOR CONTINUED VIGILANCE IN SECTORS THAT HAVE REOPENED, available at
https://www.sccgov.org/sites/covid19/Pages/press-release-06-12-2020-cases-at-construction-sites.aspx.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 9 of 33
• The perimeter fence directly adjacent to the entry points will
be clearly marked indicating the appropriate 6-foot social
distancing position for when you approach the screening
area. Please reference the Apex temperature screening site
map for additional details.
• There will be clear signage posted at the project site directing
you through temperature screening.
• Provide hand washing stations throughout the construction
site.
Testing Procedures:
• The temperature screening being used are non-contact
devices.
• Temperature readings will not be recorded.
• Personnel will be screened upon entering the testing center
and should only take 1-2 seconds per individual.
• Hard hats, head coverings, sweat, dirt, sunscreen or any
other cosmetics must be removed on the forehead before
temperature screening.
• Anyone who refuses to submit to a temperature screening or
does not answer the health screening questions will be
refused access to the Project Site.
• Screening will be performed at both entrances from 5:30 am
to 7:30 am.; main gate [ZONE 1] and personnel gate
[ZONE 2]
• After 7:30 am only the main gate entrance [ZONE 1] will
continue to be used for temperature testing for anybody
gaining entry to the project site such as returning personnel,
deliveries, and visitors.
• If the digital thermometer displays a temperature reading
above 100.0 degrees Fahrenheit, a second reading will be
taken to verify an accurate reading.
• If the second reading confirms an elevated temperature,
DHS will instruct the individual that he/she will not be
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 10 of 33
allowed to enter the Project Site. DHS will also instruct the
individual to promptly notify his/her supervisor and his/her
human resources (HR) representative and provide them with
a copy of Annex A.
Planning
• Require the development of an Infectious Disease Preparedness
and Response Plan that will include basic infection prevention
measures (requiring the use of personal protection equipment),
policies and procedures for prompt identification and isolation of
sick individuals, social distancing (prohibiting gatherings of no
more than 10 people including all-hands meetings and all-hands
lunches) communication and training and workplace controls that
meet standards that may be promulgated by the Center for
Disease Control, Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
Cal/OSHA, California Department of Public Health or applicable
local public health agencies.10
The United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Carpenters International Training Fund
has developed COVID-19 Training and Certification to ensure that Carpenter union
members and apprentices conduct safe work practices. The Agency should require
that all construction workers undergo COVID-19 Training and Certification before
being allowed to conduct construction activities at the Project Site.
D. The DEIR’s Project Objectives are Unduly Narrow and Circumscribe
Appropriate Project Alternatives
A project description must state the objectives sought by the proposed project. The
statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project, and it
should be clearly written to guide the selection of mitigation measures and alternatives
to be evaluated in the EIR. (CEQA Guidelines § 15124(b).) An EIR's description of
the underlying purpose of the project is the touchstone for its identification of
specific project objectives, and the statement of project objectives can help to define
10 See also The Center for Construction Research and Training, North America’s Building Trades Unions (April 27 2020)
NABTU and CPWR COVIC-19 Standards for U.S Constructions Sites, available at https://www.cpwr.com/sites/
default/files/NABTU CPWR Standards COVID-19.pdf; Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (2020)
Guidelines for Construction Sites During COVID-19 Pandemic, available at https://dpw.lacounty.gov/building-and-
safety/docs/pw guidelines-construction-sites.pdf.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 11 of 33
the contours of the project's purpose. (Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San
Bernardino (2016) 247 Cal. App. 4th 326, 347.)
While a lead agency has discretion to formulate the project objectives, they cannot be
so narrowly defined that they preclude discussion of project alternatives that could
still achieve the underlying purpose of the project. (North Coast Rivers Alliance v.
Kawamura (2015) 243 Cal. App. 4th 647, 668.) This is so because project alternatives
that do not achieve the project’s underlying purpose need not be considered. (In re
Bay-Delta Programmatic Envt'l Impact Report Coordinated Proceedings (2008) 43 Cal. 4th
1143, 1166.) And the statement of objectives should be based upon the underlying
purpose of the project—not the nature of the project itself. (Habitat & Watershed
Caretakers v. City of Santa Cruz (2013) 213 Cal. App. 4th 1277, 1299.)
Here, the DEIR inappropriately narrows the objectives of the project based upon the
nature of the project, and not on any underlying purpose. The Project’s objectives
include the “[development of] a high-quality private wave basin (The Wave) that
provides unique recreational opportunities for future residents of the project, and that
attracts resort guests and creates a landmark facility that will enhance the City’s
reputation as the ‘Gem of the Desert.’” (DEIR, 3-8.) If this remains a project
objective, the DEIR need not consider project alternatives that do not provide “high-
quality private wave basins.” Certainly, there is no specific requirement that the
tourism or residential housing needs of the City or region demand a surf simulation
facility. The Objective should be reformulated so that a meaningful analysis of project
alternatives can be considered.
E. The DEIR Fails to Support Its Findings with Substantial Evidence
When new information is brought to light showing that an impact previously
discussed in the DEIR but found to be insignificant with or without mitigation in the
DEIR’s analysis has the potential for a significant environmental impact supported by
substantial evidence, the EIR must consider and resolve the conflict in the evidence.
See Visalia Retail, L.P. v. City of Visalia (2018) 20 Cal. App. 5th 1, 13, 17; see also Protect
the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal. App. 4th 1099,
1109. While a lead agency has discretion to formulate standards for determining
significance and the need for mitigation measures—the choice of any standards or
thresholds of significance must be “based to the extent possible on scientific and
factual data and an exercise of reasoned judgment based on substantial evidence.
CEQA Guidelines § 15064(b); Cleveland Nat'l Forest Found. v. San Diego Ass'n of Gov'ts
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 12 of 33
(2017) 3 Cal. App. 5th 497, 515; Mission Bay Alliance v. Office of Community Inv. &
Infrastructure (2016) 6 Cal. App. 5th 160, 206. And when there is evidence that an
impact could be significant, an EIR cannot adopt a contrary finding without providing
an adequate explanation along with supporting evidence. East Sacramento Partnership for
a Livable City v. City of Sacramento (2016) 5 Cal. App. 5th 281, 302.
In addition, a determination that regulatory compliance will be sufficient to prevent
significant adverse impacts must be based on a project-specific analysis of potential
impacts and the effect of regulatory compliance. Californians for Alternatives to Toxics v.
Department of Food & Agric. (2005) 136 Cal. App. 4th 1; see also Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch
v Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (2008) 43 Cal. App. 4th 936, 956 (fact that
Department of Pesticide Regulation had assessed environmental effects of certain
herbicides in general did not excuse failure to assess effects of their use for specific
timber harvesting project).
1. The DEIR Fails to Support its Findings on Greenhouse Gas and Air
Quality Impacts with Substantial Evidence.
CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4 allow a lead agency to determine the significance of a
project’s GHG impact via a qualitative analysis (e.g., extent to which a project
complies with regulations or requirements of state/regional/local GHG plans),
and/or a quantitative analysis (e.g., using model or methodology to estimate project
emissions and compare it to a numeric threshold). So too, CEQA Guidelines allow
lead agencies to select what model or methodology to estimate GHG emissions so
long as the selection is supported with substantial evidence, and the lead agency
“should explain the limitations of the particular model or methodology selected for
use.” CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4(c).
CEQA Guidelines sections 15064.4(b)(3) and 15183.5(b) allow a lead agency to
consider a project’s consistency with regulations or requirements adopted to
implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG
emissions.
CEQA Guidelines §§ 15064.4(b)(3) and 15183.5(b)(1) make clear qualified GHG
reduction plans or CAPs should include the following features:
(1) Inventory: Quantify GHG emissions, both existing and
projected over a specified time period, resulting from activities (e.g.,
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 13 of 33
projects) within a defined geographic area (e.g., lead agency
jurisdiction);
(2) Establish GHG Reduction Goal: Establish a level, based
on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to GHG
emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be
cumulatively considerable;
(3) Analyze Project Types: Identify and analyze the GHG
emissions resulting from specific actions or categories of actions
anticipated within the geographic area;
(4) Craft Performance Based Mitigation Measures: Specify
measures or a group of measures, including performance standards,
that substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project-
by-project basis, would collectively achieve the specified emissions
level;
(5) Monitoring: Establish a mechanism to monitor the CAP
progress toward achieving said level and to require amendment if
the plan is not achieving specified levels;
Collectively, the above-listed CAP features tie qualitative measures to quantitative
results, which in turn become binding via proper monitoring and enforcement by the
jurisdiction—all resulting in real GHG reductions for the jurisdiction as a whole, and
the substantial evidence that the incremental contribution of an individual project is
not cumulatively considerable.
Here, the DEIR’s analysis of GHG impacts is unsupported by substantial evidence, as
it relies on outdated modeling. The DEIR’s analysis of air quality and GHG impacts
throughout the DEIR relies on data created using CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. (See,
e.g., DEIR, 4.1-13). A newer version of this software (currently CalEEMod version
2020.4.0) became available prior to the release of the DEIR. The DEIR provides no
discussion or justification for use of the outdated 2016 version of the software. The
use of outdated modeling software may result in underestimation of the Project’s
GHG emissions, calling the DEIR’s conclusions into question.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 14 of 33
The DEIR’s reliance on inaccurate modeling also affects its analysis of air quality
impacts and energy impacts. The DEIR potentially vastly undercounts the Project’s air
pollutant emissions.
Moreover, in its discussion of the GHG impact Significance Threshold chosen for its
GHG analysis, the DEIR chooses to use a target of 3.65 MTCO2e/yr per service
population, stating that this screening target was chosen as a linear interpolation
between the 2020 and 2030 2017 Scoping Plan reduction/efficiency targets based on
the projected 2026 buildout of the Project. (DEIR, 4.7-10). However, the DEIR fails
to provide any reasoning for this choice in either the DEIR itself or the Appendix I
Greenhouse Gas Report. Given that the 2017 Scoping Plan has a target of 2.88
MTCO2e/yr to be attained by 2030,11 it is unclear how a proration of GHG emissions
targets between 2020 and 2030 would be consistent with meeting the goals of AB 32
and SB 32.
2. The DEIR is Required to Consider and Adopt All Feasible Air Quality
and GHG Mitigation Measures
A fundamental purpose of an EIR is to identify ways in which a proposed project's
significant environmental impacts can be mitigated or avoided. Pub. Res. Code §§
21002.1(a), 21061. To implement this statutory purpose, an EIR must describe any
feasible mitigation measures that can minimize the project's significant environmental
effects. PRC §§ 21002.1(a), 21100(b)(3); CEQA Guidelines §§ 15121(a), 15126.4(a).
If the project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the
project only upon finding that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened all significant
effects on the environment where feasible”12 and find that ‘specific overriding
economic, legal, social, technology or other benefits of the project outweigh the
significant effects on the environment.”13 “A gloomy forecast of environmental
degradation is of little or no value without pragmatic, concrete means to minimize the
impacts and restore ecological equilibrium.” Environmental Council of Sacramento v. City of
Sacramento (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1018, 1039.
Here, the DEIR finds that the Project will have significant and unavoidable impacts on
air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, yet proposes mitigation measures that fall
11 Representing an emissions deduction of 40% from 1990 levels.
12 PRC §§ 21002; 21002.1, 21081; CEQA Guidelines §§ 15091, 15092(b)(2)(A).
13 PRC §§ 21002; 21002.1, 21081; CEQA Guidelines §§ 15091, 15092(b)(2)(B).
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 15 of 33
short of the “all feasible mitigation measures” standard set by CEQA. Mitigation
Measure AQ-2 requires future developments to employ U.S. EPA Tier 3 construction
equipment. However, it fails to justify with substantial evidence why U.S. EPA Tier 4
Final-compliant should not be required. Further, Mitigation Measure AQ-3 demands
the use of low-VOC architectural coatings within the Project area, but the DEIR does
not contemplate the feasibility of a requirement that “Super-Complaint” architectural
be utilized to further decrease Air Quality impacts.
Additionally, the DEIR notes that the Project will require the “design [of] building
shells and building components… to meet 2019 Title 24 Standards,” (DEIR, 4.1-14),
but does not specify which standards it is specifically referring to—energy efficiency
standards or CalGreen building standards. Though the DEIR states that both should
apply, it does not state the Project’s level of compliance with Tile 24 standards. The
Title 24 “CalGreen” building standards include two different standard “tiers” (Tier 1
and Tier 2) for both residential and non-residential buildings. (Cal. Code of
Regulations, Title 24, Part 11, Appendix A4 at A4.601 and Appendix A5 at A5.601).
The DEIR does not address which tier is applicable within the Project’s specific plan
area, and does not state that that the more stringent Tier 2 standards for residential and
non-residential development should be followed. The City should reevaluate the
mitigation measures proposed in the DEIR to ensure the adoption of all feasible
mitigation measures as required by CEQA.
3. The DEIR Improperly Labels Mitigation Measures as “Project Design
Features”
The DEIR improperly labels mitigation measures for “Project Design Features” or
“PDFs” which the DEIR purports will reduce environmental impacts. (See, e.g., DEIR,
4.1-13 through 4.1-15 (Air Quality); see also DEIR, 4.5-18 through 4.5-19 (Energy);
DEIR, 4.7-11 through 13 (Greenhouse Gas Emissions).) Many of the DEIR’s
conclusions regarding mitigation of environmental impacts below levels of significance
rely on the implementation of these PDFs, and that as such no additional mitigation is
required.
However, it is established that “’[a]voidance, minimization and / or mitigation
measure’ . . . are not ‘part of the project.’ . . . compressing the analysis of impacts and
mitigation measures into a single issue . . disregards the requirements of CEQA.”
(Lotus v. Department of Transportation (2014) 223 Cal. App. 4th 645, 656.)
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 16 of 33
When “an agency decides to incorporate mitigation measures into its significance
determination, and relies on those mitigation measures to determine that no
significant effects will occur, that agency must treat those measures as though there
were adopted following a finding of significance.” (Lotus, supra, 223 Cal. App. 4th at
652 [citing CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1) and Cal. Public Resources Code §
21081(a)(1).])
By labeling mitigation measures as project design features, the City violates CEQA by
failing to disclose “the analytic route that the agency took from the evidence to its
findings.” (Cal. Public Resources Code § 21081.5; CEQA Guidelines § 15093; Village
Laguna of Laguna Beach, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1982) 134 Cal. App. 3d 1022, 1035
[quoting Topanga Assn for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal. 3d
506, 515.])
The DEIR’s use of “Project Design Features” further violates CEQA because such
measures would not be included in the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program CEQA requires lead agencies to adopt mitigation measures that are fully
enforceable and to adopt a monitoring and/or reporting program to ensure that the
measures are implemented to reduce the Project’s significant environmental effects to
the extent feasible. (PRC § 21081.6; CEQA Guidelines § 15091(d).) Though they are
presumably enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of the Project’s
Development Agreement, the PDFs should be properly adopted as mitigations and
subject to a mitigation monitoring and reporting program under CEQA.
4. The DEIR Fails to Support Its Findings on Population and Housing and
Recreation with Substantial Evidence
The City’s Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) concluded that the Project will have a less
than significant impact on population and housing, and thus precluded the DEIR from
undertaking any further analysis of the direct or indirect effects of the Project on
population growth in the City. Thus, the DEIR does not analyze the issue. Analysis of
Population and Housing impacts was ruled out by NOP, on the grounds that projected
population growth related to the Project still puts the City under its 2035 population
forecast. (DEIR, Appendix A, NOP at pp. 39-40.) La Quinta’s General Plan
Environmental Impact Report forecasts a population of 46,297 people by 2035 (Id.),
whereas predicted growth related to the project is 1,698 new residents, (DEIR, 6-6),
raising the population to 42,358 (2,181 new residents in the NOP (raising the
population to 42,841)). However, SCAG’s comment on the City’s NOP forecasts a
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 17 of 33
lower population of 45,034 by 2035. (DEIR, Appendix A, Letter from Southern
California Association of Governments to Nicole Sauviat Criste (April 1, 2021) at p. 4.)
The Project will ultimately result in a net increase in housing, and may have
cumulatively considerable impacts with other housing projects in the area, especially
the adjacent Andalusia project. An EIR’s discussion of cumulative impacts is required
by CEQA Guidelines §15130(a). The determination of whether there are cumulative
impacts in any issue area should be determined based on an assessment of the project's
incremental effects “viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects
of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.” (CEQA
Guidelines §15065(a)(3); Banning Ranch Conservancy v City of Newport Beach (2012) 211
Cal. App. 4th 1209, 1228; see also CEQA Guidelines §15355(b).)
The DEIR demurs on any cumulative impacts analysis based on the assumption that
the Project “is not anticipated to result in an indirect growth inducing impact vecause
the existing infrastructure has been sized to accommodate long term growth… and
because the projected population growth is already included in the City of La Quinta’s
General Plan.” (DEIR, 6-7). The DEIR cannot simply ignore the fact that 1,698 new
residents will potentially be drawn to the City by the Project and not consider the
cumulative effect of that projected population growth with that of other pending
projects. This is a potentially significant impact that the DEIR should analyze.
In addition, neither the DEIR nor the NOP contain any substantive discussion of
Recreation impacts. (See NOP at pp. 41-42; DEIR, 6-7 through 6-8). The CEQA
Guidelines identify a threshold of significance related to whether or not a project will
include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. The Project
dedicates 23.6 acres of previously-open space to the development of recreational
facilities on in the Project area, including the potential development of rope courses.
This has reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts and requires analysis in the
DEIR. Payment of Quimby fees (a mitigation) does not excuse the DEIR from
analysis of environmental impacts the Project will have via the creation of recreational
spaces.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 18 of 33
F. The DEIR Fails to Demonstrate Consistency with SCAG’s RTP/SCS
Plans
Senate Bill No. 375 requires regional planning agencies to include a sustainable
communities strategy in their regional transportation plans. Gov. Code § 65080,
sub.(b)(2)(B).) CEQA Guidelines § 15125(d) provides that an EIR “shall discuss any
inconsistencies between the proposed project and…regional plans. Such regional plans
include…regional transportation plans.” Thus, CEQA requires analysis of any
inconsistencies between the Project and the relevant RTP/SCS plan.
In April 2012, SCAG adopted its 2012-2035 RTP/ SCS (“2012 RTP/SCS”), which
proposed specific land use policies and transportation strategies for local governments
to implement that will help the region achieve GHG emission reductions of 9 percent
per capita in 2020 and 16 percent per capita in 2035.
In April 2016, SCAG adopted the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS (“2016 RTP/SCS”)14, which
incorporates and builds upon the policies and strategies in the 2012 RTP/SCS 15, that
will help the region achieve GHG emission reductions that would reduce the region’s
per capita transportation emissions by eight percent by 2020 and 18 percent by 2035.16
SCAG’s RTP/SCS plan is based upon the same requirements outlined in CARB’s 2017
Scoping Plan and SB 375.
On September 3, 2020, SCAG adopted the 2020 – 2045 RTP / SCS titled Connect
SoCal (“2020 RTP/ SCS”).17 The 2020 RTP / SCS adopts policies and strategies aimed
at reducing the region’s per capita greenhouse gas emissions by 8% below 2005 per
capita emissions levels by 2020 and 19% below 2005 per capita emissions levels by
2035. 18
For both the 2012 and 2016 RTP/SCS, SCAG prepared Program Environmental
Impact Reports (“PEIR”) that include Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs
(“MMRP”) that list project-level environmental mitigation measures that directly
and/or indirectly relate to a project’s GHG impacts and contribution to the region’s
15 SCAG (Apr. 2016) 2016 RTP/SCS, p. 69, 75-115 (attached as Exhibit D).
16 Id., p. 8, 15, 153, 166.
17 SCAG (Sept 2020) Connect Socal: The 2020 – 2045 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable
Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments, available at
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal-plan 0.pdf?1606001176
18 Id. At xiii.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 19 of 33
GHG emissions.19 These environmental mitigation measures serve to help local
municipalities when identifying mitigation to reduce impacts on a project-specific basis
that can and should be implemented when they identify and mitigate project-specific
environmental impacts.20
Here, the DEIR fails to analyze the Project’s is consistency with any of SCAG’s
aforementioned RTP/SCS Plans. The DEIR must demonstrate that the Project is
consistent with the RTP/SCS Plans’ project-level goals, including:
Land Use and Transportation
• Providing transit fare discounts 21;
• Implementing transit integration strategies 22; and
• Anticipating shared mobility platforms, car-to-car communications, and
automated vehicle technologies.23
GHG Emissions Goals 24
• Reduction in emissions resulting from a project through implementation of
project features, project design, or other measures, such as those described in
Appendix F of the State CEQA Guidelines,25 such as:
o Potential measures to reduce wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary
consumption of energy during construction, operation, maintenance
and/or removal. The discussion should explain why certain measures
were incorporated in the project and why other measures were dismissed.
19 Id., p. 116-124; see also SCAG (April 2012) Regional Transportation Plan 2012 – 20135, fn. 38, p. 77-86
(attached as Exhibit E).
20 SCAG 2012 RTP/SCS (attached as Exhibit E), p. 77; see also SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS, fn. 41, p. 115.
21 SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS, pp. 75-114
22 Id.
23 Id.
24 SCAG 2012 RTP/SCS (Mar. 2012) Final PEIR MMRP, p. 6-2—6-14 (including mitigation measures (“MM”)
AQ3, BIO/OS3, CUL2, GEO3, GHG15, HM3, LU14, NO1, POP4, PS12, TR23, W9 [stating “[l]ocal
agencies can and should comply with the requirements of CEQA to mitigate impacts to [the environmental]
as applicable and feasible …[and] may refer to Appendix G of this PEIR for examples of potential mitigation
to consider when appropriate in reducing environmental impacts of future projects.” (Emphasis added)]),; see
also id., Final PEIR Appendix G (including MMs AQ1-23, GHG1-8, PS1-104, TR1-83, W1-62),; SCAG 2016
RTP/SCS (Mar. 2016) Final PEIR MMRP, p. 11–63 (including MMs AIR-2(b), AIR-4(b), EN- 2(b), GHG-
3(b), HYD-1(b), HYD-2(b), HYD-8(b), TRA-1(b), TRA-2(b), USS-4(b), USS-6(b)).
25 CEQA Guidelines, Appendix F-Energy Conservation, http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/
guidelines/Appendix_F.html.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 20 of 33
o The potential siting, orientation, and design to minimize energy
consumption, including transportation energy.
o The potential for reducing peak energy demand.
o Alternate fuels (particularly renewable ones) or energy systems.
o Energy conservation which could result from recycling efforts.
• Off-site measures to mitigate a project’s emissions.
• Measures that consider incorporation of Best Available Control Technology
(BACT) during design, construction and operation of projects to minimize
GHG emissions, including but not limited to:
o Use energy and fuel-efficient vehicles and equipment;
o Deployment of zero- and/or near zero emission technologies;
o Use cement blended with the maximum feasible amount of flash or other
materials that reduce GHG emissions from cement production;
o Incorporate design measures to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste
management through encouraging solid waste recycling and reuse;
o Incorporate design measures to reduce energy consumption and increase
use of renewable energy;
o Incorporate design measures to reduce water consumption;
o Use lighter-colored pavement where feasible;
o Recycle construction debris to maximum extent feasible;
• Adopting employer trip reduction measures to reduce employee trips such as
vanpool and carpool programs, providing end-of-trip facilities, and
telecommuting programs.
• Designate a percentage of parking spaces for ride-sharing vehicles or high-
occupancy vehicles, and provide adequate passenger loading and unloading for
those vehicles;
• Land use siting and design measures that reduce GHG emissions, including:
o Measures that increase vehicle efficiency, encourage use of zero and low
emissions vehicles, or reduce the carbon content of fuels, including
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 21 of 33
constructing or encouraging construction of electric vehicle charging
stations or neighborhood electric vehicle networks, or charging for
electric bicycles; and
o Measures to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste management
through encouraging solid waste recycling and reuse.
Hydrology & Water Quality Goals
• Incorporate measures consistent in a manner that conforms to the standards set
by regulatory agencies responsible for regulating water quality/supply
requirements, such as:
o Reduce exterior consumptive uses of water in public areas, and should
promote reductions in private homes and businesses, by shifting to
drought-tolerant native landscape plantings(xeriscaping), using weather-
based irrigation systems, educating other public agencies about water use,
and installing related water pricing incentives.
o Promote the availability of drought-resistant landscaping options and
provide information on where these can be purchased. Use of reclaimed
water especially in median landscaping and hillside landscaping can and
should be implemented where feasible.
o Implement water conservation best practices such as low-flow toilets,
water-efficient clothes washers, water system audits, and leak detection
and repair.
o Ensure that projects requiring continual dewatering facilities implement
monitoring systems and long-term administrative procedures to ensure
proper water management that prevents degrading of surface water and
minimizes, to the greatest extent possible, adverse impacts on
groundwater for the life of the project. Comply with appropriate building
codes and standard practices including the Uniform Building Code.
o Maximize, where practical and feasible, permeable surface area in existing
urbanized areas to protect water quality, reduce flooding, allow for
groundwater recharge, and preserve wildlife habitat. Minimized new
impervious surfaces to the greatest extent possible, including the use of
in-lieu fees and off-site mitigation.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 22 of 33
o Avoid designs that require continual dewatering where feasible.
o Where feasible, do not site transportation facilities in groundwater
recharge areas, to prevent conversion of those areas to impervious
surface.
• Incorporate measures consistent in a manner that conforms to the standards set
by regulatory agencies responsible for regulating and enforcing water quality and
waste discharge requirements, such as:
o Complete, and have approved, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(“SWPPP”) before initiation of construction.
o Implement Best Management Practices to reduce the peak stormwater
runoff from the project site to the maximum extent practicable.
o Comply with the Caltrans stormwater discharge permit as applicable; and
identify and implement Best Management Practices to manage site
erosion, wash water runoff, and spill control.
o Complete, and have approved, a Standard Urban Stormwater
Management Plan, prior to occupancy of residential or commercial
structures.
o Ensure adequate capacity of the surrounding stormwater system to
support stormwater runoff from new or rehabilitated structures or
buildings.
o Prior to construction within an area subject to Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act, obtain all required permit approvals and certifications for
construction within the vicinity of a watercourse (e.g., Army Corps § 404
permit, Regional Waterboard § 401 permit, Fish & Wildlife § 401 permit).
o Where feasible, restore or expand riparian areas such that there is no net
loss of impervious surface as a result of the project.
o Install structural water quality control features, such as drainage channels,
detention basins, oil and grease traps, filter systems, and vegetated buffers
to prevent pollution of adjacent water resources by polluted runoff where
required by applicable urban stormwater runoff discharge permits, on
new facilities.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 23 of 33
o Provide structural stormwater runoff treatment consistent with the
applicable urban stormwater runoff permit where Caltrans is the
operator, the statewide permit applies.
o Provide operational best management practices for street cleaning, litter
control, and catch basin cleaning are implemented to prevent water
quality degradation in compliance with applicable stormwater runoff
discharge permits; and ensure treatment controls are in place as early as
possible, such as during the acquisition process for rights-of-way, not just
later during the facilities design and construction phase.
o Comply with applicable municipal separate storm sewer system discharge
permits as well as Caltrans’ stormwater discharge permit including long-
term sediment control and drainage of roadway runoff.
o Incorporate as appropriate treatment and control features such as
detention basins, infiltration strips, and porous paving, other features to
control surface runoff and facilitate groundwater recharge into the design
of new transportation projects early on in the process to ensure that
adequate acreage and elevation contours are provided during the right-of-
way acquisition process.
o Design projects to maintain volume of runoff, where any downstream
receiving water body has not been designed and maintained to
accommodate the increase in flow velocity, rate, and volume without
impacting the water's beneficial uses. Pre-project flow velocities, rates,
volumes must not be exceeded. This applies not only to increases in
stormwater runoff from the project site, but also to hydrologic changes
induced by flood plain encroachment. Projects should not cause or
contribute to conditions that degrade the physical integrity or ecological
function of any downstream receiving waters.
o Provide culverts and facilities that do not increase the flow velocity, rate,
or volume and/or acquiring sufficient storm drain easements that
accommodate an appropriately vegetated earthen drainage channel.
o Upgrade stormwater drainage facilities to accommodate any increased
runoff volumes. These upgrades may include the construction of
detention basins or structures that will delay peak flows and reduce flow
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 24 of 33
velocities, including expansion and restoration of wetlands and riparian
buffer areas. System designs shall be completed to eliminate increases in
peak flow rates from current levels.
o Encourage Low Impact Development (“LID”) and incorporation of
natural spaces that reduce, treat, infiltrate and manage stormwater runoff
flows in all new developments, where practical and feasible.
• Incorporate measures consistent with the provisions of the Groundwater
Management Act and implementing regulations, such as:
o For projects requiring continual dewatering facilities, implement
monitoring systems and long-term administrative procedures to ensure
proper water management that prevents degrading of surface water and
minimizes, to the greatest extent possible, adverse impacts on
groundwater for the life of the project, Construction designs shall comply
with appropriate building codes and standard practices including the
Uniform Building Code.
o Maximize, where practical and feasible, permeable surface area in existing
urbanized areas to protect water quality, reduce flooding, allow for
groundwater recharge, and preserve wildlife habitat. Minimize to the
greatest extent possible, new impervious surfaces, including the use of in-
lieu fees and off-site mitigation.
o Avoid designs that require continual dewatering where feasible.
o Avoid construction and siting on groundwater recharge areas, to prevent
conversion of those areas to impervious surface.
o Reduce hardscape to the extent feasible to facilitate groundwater recharge
as appropriate.
• Incorporate mitigation measures to ensure compliance with all federal, state, and
local floodplain regulations, consistent with the provisions of the National
Flood Insurance Program, such as:
o Comply with Executive Order 11988 on Floodplain Management, which
requires avoidance of incompatible floodplain development, restoration
and preservation of the natural and beneficial floodplain values, and
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 25 of 33
maintenance of consistency with the standards and criteria of the
National Flood Insurance Program.
o Ensure that all roadbeds for new highway and rail facilities be elevated at
least one foot above the 100-year base flood elevation. Since alluvial fan
flooding is not often identified on FEMA flood maps, the risk of alluvial
fan flooding should be evaluated and projects should be sited to avoid
alluvial fan flooding. Delineation of floodplains and alluvial fan
boundaries should attempt to account for future hydrologic changes
caused by global climate change.
Transportation, Traffic, and Safety
• Institute teleconferencing, telecommute and/or flexible work hour programs to
reduce unnecessary employee transportation.
• Create a ride-sharing program by designating a certain percentage of parking
spaces for ride sharing vehicles, designating adequate passenger loading and
unloading for ride sharing vehicles, and providing a web site or message board
for coordinating rides.
• Provide a vanpool for employees.
• Provide a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan containing
strategies to reduce on-site parking demand and single occupancy vehicle travel.
The TDM shall include strategies to increase bicycle, pedestrian, transit, and
carpools/vanpool use, including:
o Inclusion of additional bicycle parking, shower, and locker facilities that
exceed the requirement.
o Direct transit sales or subsidized transit passes.
o Guaranteed ride home program.
o Pre-tax commuter benefits (checks).
o On-site car-sharing program (such as City Car Share, Zip Car, etc.).
o On-site carpooling program.
o Distribution of information concerning alternative transportation
options.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 26 of 33
o Parking spaces sold/leased separately.
o Parking management strategies; including attendant/valet parking and
shared parking spaces.
• Promote ride sharing programs e.g., by designating a certain percentage of
parking spaces for high-occupancy vehicles, providing larger parking spaces to
accommodate vans used for ride-sharing, and designating adequate passenger
loading and unloading and waiting areas.
• Encourage the use of public transit systems by enhancing safety and cleanliness
on vehicles and in and around stations, providing shuttle service to public
transit, offering public transit incentives and providing public education and
publicity about public transportation services.
• Build or fund a major transit stop within or near transit development upon
consultation with applicable CTCs.
• Work with the school districts to improve pedestrian and bike access to schools
and to restore or expand school bus service using lower-emitting vehicles.
• Purchase, or create incentives for purchasing, low or zero-emission vehicles.
• Provide the necessary facilities and infrastructure to encourage the use of low or
zero-emission vehicles.
• Promote ride sharing programs, if determined feasible and applicable by the
Lead Agency, including:
o Designate a certain percentage of parking spaces for ride-sharing vehicles.
o Designate adequate passenger loading, unloading, and waiting areas for
ride-sharing vehicles.
o Provide a web site or message board for coordinating shared rides.
o Encourage private, for-profit community car-sharing, including parking
spaces for car share vehicles at convenient locations accessible by public
transit.
o Hire or designate a rideshare coordinator to develop and implement
ridesharing programs.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 27 of 33
• Support voluntary, employer-based trip reduction programs, if determined
feasible and applicable by the Lead Agency, including:
o Provide assistance to regional and local ridesharing organizations.
o Advocate for legislation to maintain and expand incentives for employer
ridesharing programs.
o Require the development of Transportation Management Associations
for large employers and commercial/ industrial complexes.
o Provide public recognition of effective programs through awards, top ten
lists, and other mechanisms.
• Implement a “guaranteed ride home” program for those who commute by
public transit, ridesharing, or other modes of transportation, and encourage
employers to subscribe to or support the program.
• Encourage and utilize shuttles to serve neighborhoods, employment centers and
major destinations.
• Create a free or low-cost local area shuttle system that includes a fixed route to
popular tourist destinations or shopping and business centers.
• Work with existing shuttle service providers to coordinate their services.
• Facilitate employment opportunities that minimize the need for private vehicle
trips, such as encourage telecommuting options with new and existing
employers, through project review and incentives, as appropriate.
• Organize events and workshops to promote GHG-reducing activities.
• Implement a Parking Management Program to discourage private vehicle use,
including:
o Encouraging carpools and vanpools with preferential parking and a
reduced parking fee.
o Institute a parking cash-out program or establish a parking fee for all
single-occupant vehicles.
Utilities & Service Systems
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 28 of 33
• Integrate green building measures consistent with CALGreen (Title 24, part 11),
U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design,
energy Star Homes, Green Point Rated Homes, and the California Green
Builder Program into project design including, but not limited to the following:
o Reuse and minimization of construction and demolition (C&D) debris
and diversion of C&D waste from landfills to recycling facilities.
o Inclusion of a waste management plan that promotes maximum C&D
diversion.
o Development of indoor recycling program and space.
o Discourage exporting of locally generated waste outside of the SCAG
region during the construction and implementation of a project.
Encourage disposal within the county where the waste originates as much
as possible. Promote green technologies for long-distance transport of
waste (e.g., clean engines and clean locomotives or electric rail for waste-
by-rail disposal systems) and consistency with SCAQMD and 2016
RTP/SCS policies can and should be required.
o Develop ordinances that promote waste prevention and recycling
activities such as: requiring waste prevention and recycling efforts at all
large events and venues; implementing recycled content procurement
programs; and developing opportunities to divert food waste away from
landfills and toward food banks and composting facilities.
o Develop alternative waste management strategies such as composting,
recycling, and conversion technologies.
o Develop and site composting, recycling, and conversion technology
facilities that have minimum environmental and health impacts.
o Require the reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste
(including, but not limited to, soil, vegetation, concrete, lumber, metal,
and cardboard).
o Integrate reuse and recycling into residential industrial, institutional and
commercial projects.
o Provide recycling opportunities for residents, the public, and tenant
businesses.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 29 of 33
o Provide education and publicity about reducing waste and available
recycling services.
o Implement or expand city or county-wide recycling and composting
programs for residents and businesses. This could include extending the
types of recycling services offered (e.g., to include food and green waste
recycling) and providing public education and publicity about recycling
services.
The DEIR fails to mention or demonstrate consistency with the above listed measures
and strategies of the SCAG RTP/SCS Plans. The DEIR should be revised to indicate
what specific project-level mitigation measures that will be followed to demonstrate
consistency with the RTP/SCS Plans.
G. Failure to Include Consultation and Preparation Section
CEQA requires all EIRs contain certain contents. See CEQA Guidelines §§ 15122 –
15131. CEQA expressly requires an EIR “identify all federal, state, or local agencies,
other organizations, and private individuals consulted in preparing the draft EIR, and
the persons, firm, or agency preparing the draft EIR, by contract or other
authorization.” CEQA Guidelines § 15129. This information is critical to
demonstrating a lead agency fulfilled its obligation to “consult with, and obtain
comments from, each responsible agency, trustee agency, any public agency that has
jurisdiction by law with respect to the project, and any city or county that borders on
a city or county within which the project is located ….” PRC § 21104(a).
Failure to provide sufficient information concerning the lead agency’s consultation
efforts could undermine the legal sufficiency of an EIR. Courts determine de novo
whether a CEQA environmental document sufficiently discloses information required
by CEQA as “noncompliance with the information disclosure provisions” of CEQA
is a failure to proceed in a manner required by law. PRC § 21005(a); see also Sierra Club
v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal. 5th 502, 515.
Here, the DEIR fails to identify which federal agencies, state agencies, local agencies,
or other organizations, if any, that were consulted in the preparation of this DEIR.
The DEIR should be revised to identify the organizations the City consulted with in
the preparation of the DEIR in compliance with Section 21104(a) of the Public
Resources Code.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 30 of 33
II. THE PROJECT VIOLATES THE STATE PLANNING AND
ZONING LAW AS WELL AS THE CITY’S GENERAL PLAN
A. Background Regarding the State Planning and Zoning Law
Each California city and county must adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan
governing development. Napa Citizens for Honest Gov. v. Napa County Bd. of Supervisors
(2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 342, 352, citing Gov. Code §§ 65030, 65300. The general plan
sits at the top of the land use planning hierarchy, and serves as a “constitution” or
“charter” for all future development. DeVita v. County of Napa (1995) 9 Cal.4th 763,
773; Lesher Communications, Inc. v. City of Walnut Creek (1990) 52 Cal.3d 531, 540.
General plan consistency is “the linchpin of California’s land use and development
laws; it is the principle which infused the concept of planned growth with the force
of law.” See Debottari v. Norco City Council (1985) 171 Cal.App.3d 1204, 1213.
State law mandates two levels of consistency. First, a general plan must be internally
or “horizontally” consistent: its elements must “comprise an integrated, internally
consistent and compatible statement of policies for the adopting agency.” See Gov.
Code § 65300.5; Sierra Club v. Bd. of Supervisors (1981) 126 Cal.App.3d 698, 704. A
general plan amendment thus may not be internally inconsistent, nor may it cause the
general plan as a whole to become internally inconsistent. See DeVita, 9 Cal.4th at 796
fn. 12.
Second, state law requires “vertical” consistency, meaning that zoning ordinances and
other land use decisions also must be consistent with the general plan. See Gov.
Code § 65860(a)(2) [land uses authorized by zoning ordinance must be “compatible
with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the
[general] plan.”]; see also Neighborhood Action Group v. County of Calaveras (1984) 156
Cal.App.3d 1176, 1184. A zoning ordinance that conflicts with the general plan or
impedes achievement of its policies is invalid and cannot be given effect. See Lesher,
52 Cal.3d at 544.
State law requires that all subordinate land use decisions, including conditional use
permits, be consistent with the general plan. See Gov. Code § 65860(a)(2);
Neighborhood Action Group, 156 Cal.App.3d at 1184.
A project cannot be found consistent with a general plan if it conflicts with a general
plan policy that is “fundamental, mandatory, and clear,” regardless of whether it is
consistent with other general plan policies. See Endangered Habitats League v. County of
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 31 of 33
Orange (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 777, 782-83; Families Unafraid to Uphold Rural El Dorado
County v. Bd. of Supervisors (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 1332, 1341-42 (“FUTURE”).
Moreover, even in the absence of such a direct conflict, an ordinance or development
project may not be approved if it interferes with or frustrates the general plan’s
policies and objectives. See Napa Citizens, 91 Cal.App.4th at 378-79; see also Lesher, 52
Cal.3d at 544 (zoning ordinance restricting development conflicted with growth-
oriented policies of general plan).
As explained in full below, the Project is inconsistent with the City’s General Plan. As
such, the Project violates the State Planning and Zoning law.
B. The Project is Inconsistent with the General Plan, and thus the DEIR’s
Conclusions Regarding Impacts on Land Use and Planning are
Unsupported by Substantial Evidence
The DEIR fail to establish the Project’s consistency with several General Plan goals,
policies, and programs including the following:
• Policy LU-2.3: The City’s outdoor lighting ordinance will be maintained;
• Goal LU-3 and associated policies and programs: Safe and identifiable
neighborhoods that provide a sense of place;
• Policy LU-5.1: Use development incentives to achieve a mix of housing,
including affordable housing;
• Policy CIR-1.14: Private streets shall be developed in accordance with
development standards set forth in the Municipal Code, relevant Public
Works Bulletins, and other applicable standards and guidelines;
• Policy SC-1.2: Reduce water consumption at a minimum consistent with
the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (also see Air Quality Element);
• Policy SC-1.4: Reduce Greenhouse Gas emissions at a minimum
consistent with the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (also see Air Quality
Element);
• Goal H-2 and associated policies and programs: Assist in the creation and
provision of resources to support housing for lower and moderate income
households;
• Goal H-3 and associated policies and programs: Create a regulatory system
that does not unduly constrain the maintenance, improvement, and
development of housing affordable to all La Quinta residents;
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 32 of 33
• Goal H-5 and associated policies and programs: Provide equal housing
opportunities for all persons;
• Goal AQ-1 and associated policies and programs: A reduction in all air
emissions generated within the City;
• Goal BIO-1 and associated policies and programs: The protection and
preservation of native and environmentally significant biological resources
and their habitats;
• Policy WR-1.6: Encourage the use of permeable pavements in residential
and commercial development projects;
• Goal OS-2 and associated policies and programs: Good stewardship of
natural open space and preservation of open space areas;
• Goal OS-3 and associated policies and programs: Preservation of scenic
resources as vital contributions to the City’s economic health and overall
quality of life;
• Policy UTL-1.3: New development shall reduce its projected water
consumption rates over “business-as-usual” consumption rates.
The Project fails to discuss its conformity with each of the aforementioned Goals,
Policies, and Programs laid out in the City’s General Plan, even though the Project will
have reasonably foreseeable impacts on land use, traffic, housing and population,
biological resources, vehicle trip generation, air quality, and GHG emissions. This
discussion is relevant not only to compliance with land use and zoning law, but also
with the contemplation of the Project’s consistency with land use plans, policies, and
regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental impacts.
The DEIR should be amended to include analysis of the Project’s comportment with
the Goals, Policies, and Programs listed above.
Further, the DEIR should be revised to analyze the Project’s consistency with the
City’s upcoming 6th Cycle Housing Element Update and its related Regional Housing
Needs Assessment.
III. CONCLUSION
Commenters request that the City revise and recirculate the Project’s DEIR and/or
prepare an environmental impact report which addresses the aforementioned
concerns. If the City has any questions or concerns, feel free to contact my Office.
Sincerely,
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 33 of 33
______________________
Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorneys for Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
Attached:
March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and
Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling (Exhibit A);
Air Quality and GHG Expert Paul Rosenfeld CV (Exhibit B);
Air Quality and GHG Expert Matt Hagemann CV (Exhibit C);
EXHIBIT A
1
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
mhagemann@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
prosenfeld@swape.com
March 8, 2021
Mitchell M. Tsai
155 South El Molino, Suite 104
Pasadena, CA 91101
Subject: Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling
Dear Mr. Tsai,
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (“SWAPE”) is pleased to provide the following draft technical report
explaining the significance of worker trips required for construction of land use development projects with
respect to the estimation of greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions. The report will also discuss the potential for
local hire requirements to reduce the length of worker trips, and consequently, reduced or mitigate the
potential GHG impacts.
Worker Trips and Greenhouse Gas Calculations
The California Emissions Estimator Model (“CalEEMod”) is a “statewide land use emissions computer model
designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental
professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with both
construction and operations from a variety of land use projects.”1 CalEEMod quantifies construction-related
emissions associated with land use projects resulting from off-road construction equipment; on-road mobile
equipment associated with workers, vendors, and hauling; fugitive dust associated with grading, demolition,
truck loading, and on-road vehicles traveling along paved and unpaved roads; and architectural coating
activities; and paving.2
The number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to calculate emissions associated
with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the Project site during construction.3
1 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home.
2 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home.
3 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/01 user-39-s-guide2016-3-2 15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34.
2
Specifically, the number and length of vehicle trips is utilized to estimate the vehicle miles travelled (“VMT”)
associated with construction. Then, utilizing vehicle-class specific EMFAC 2014 emission factors, CalEEMod
calculates the vehicle exhaust, evaporative, and dust emissions resulting from construction-related VMT,
including personal vehicles for worker commuting.4
Specifically, in order to calculate VMT, CalEEMod multiplies the average daily trip rate by the average overall trip
length (see excerpt below):
“VMTd = Σ(Average Daily Trip Rate i * Average Overall Trip Length i) n
Where:
n = Number of land uses being modeled.”5
Furthermore, to calculate the on-road emissions associated with worker trips, CalEEMod utilizes the following
equation (see excerpt below):
“Emissionspollutant = VMT * EFrunning,pollutant
Where:
Emissionspollutant = emissions from vehicle running for each pollutant
VMT = vehicle miles traveled
EFrunning,pollutant = emission factor for running emissions.”6
Thus, there is a direct relationship between trip length and VMT, as well as a direct relationship between VMT
and vehicle running emissions. In other words, when the trip length is increased, the VMT and vehicle running
emissions increase as a result. Thus, vehicle running emissions can be reduced by decreasing the average overall
trip length, by way of a local hire requirement or otherwise.
Default Worker Trip Parameters and Potential Local Hire Requirements
As previously discussed, the number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to
calculate emissions associated with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the
Project site during construction.7 In order to understand how local hire requirements and associated worker trip
length reductions impact GHG emissions calculations, it is important to consider the CalEEMod default worker
trip parameters. CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site-specific information, such as
land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project
type. If more specific project information is known, the user can change the default values and input project-
specific values, but the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requires that such changes be justified by
substantial evidence.8 The default number of construction-related worker trips is calculated by multiplying the
4 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 14-15.
5 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 23.
6 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 15.
7 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/01 user-39-s-guide2016-3-2 15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34.
8 CalEEMod User Guide, available at: http://www.caleemod.com/, p. 1, 9.
5
Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we
retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional
services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar
circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of
service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and
protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which
were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain
informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of
information obtained or provided by third parties.
Sincerely,
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
EXHIBIT B
SOIL WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, California 90405
Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
Mobil: (310) 795-2335
Office: (310) 452-5555
Fax: (310) 452-5550
Email: prosenfeld@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 1 of 10 June 2019
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling
Principal Environmental Chemist Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist
Education
Ph.D. Soil Chemistry, University of Washington, 1999. Dissertation on volatile organic compound filtration.
M.S. Environmental Science, U.C. Berkeley, 1995. Thesis on organic waste economics.
B.A. Environmental Studies, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1991. Thesis on wastewater treatment.
Professional Experience
Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years’ experience conducting environmental investigations and risk assessments for
evaluating impacts to human health, property, and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and
transport of environmental contaminants, human health risk, exposure assessment, and ecological restoration. Dr.
Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from unconventional oil drilling operations, oil spills, landfills,
boilers and incinerators, process stacks, storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, and many other industrial
and agricultural sources. His project experience ranges from monitoring and modeling of pollution sources to
evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at industrial facilities and residents in surrounding communities.
Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk assessments for contaminated sites
containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria, particulate matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents,
pesticides, radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs, PAHs, perchlorate,
asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS), unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates (MTBE), among
other pollutants. Dr. Rosenfeld also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from various projects and is
an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as the evaluation of odor nuisance
impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous emissions. As a principal scientist at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld
directs air dispersion modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert witness and testified about
pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at dozens of sites and has testified as an expert witness on
more than ten cases involving exposure to air contaminants from industrial sources.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 10 June 2019
Professional History:
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner
UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher)
UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor
UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator
UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate
Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist
National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor
Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager
Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager
Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 – 2000; Risk Assessor
King County, Seattle, 1996 – 1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist
Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist
Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist
Publications:
Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil
Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48
Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property
Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342
Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C.,
(2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated
Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632.
Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks of Hazardous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and
Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL.
Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113–125.
Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and
Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal
of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living
near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air
Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 10 June 2019
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid
Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two
Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255.
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins
And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527-
000530.
Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near
a Former Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197.
Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for
Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357.
Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater,
Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344.
Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food,
Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science
and Technology. 49(9),171-178.
Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor-Quality-Wheel Classification Scheme
For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation’s Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC)
2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities,
and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science
and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from
Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using
High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management
Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS–6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water
Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal
of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor
emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research. 73(4), 363-367.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and
Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor.
Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 10 June 2019
Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and
distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users
Network, 7(1).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids
Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters
thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third
World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California.
Presentations:
Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile
organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American
Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA.
Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.;
Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water.
Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse,
R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis,
Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS)
Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United
States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting, Lecture conducted
from Tuscon, AZ.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United
States” Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the
United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture
conducted from Tuscon, AZ.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in
populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air
Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and
Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing
Facility. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from
University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium-Contaminated Water Into A
Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23rd Annual International
Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst
MA.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 10 June 2019
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment
Facility Emissions. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted
from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3-
Trichloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting . Lecture
conducted from San Diego, CA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAH, and Metal Exposure in Florala,
Alabama. The AEHS Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 – 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on
Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants – DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia
Hotel in Oslo Norway.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. APHA 134 Annual Meeting &
Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
Mealey’s C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel,
Philadelphia, PA.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton
Hotel, Irvine California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA
Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey’s Groundwater
Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from
Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related
Perfluorochemicals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Law Conference.
Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water and
Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability
and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundwater Association. Environmental
Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust.
Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona.
Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River.
Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 10 June 2019
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners.
Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento,
California.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh
International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical
Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus
Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California
CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA
Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and
Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water
Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.
Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association . Lecture
conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 11-14, 2002). Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a
Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from
Indianapolis, Maryland.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Water
Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted
from Ocean Shores, California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery
Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil
Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from
Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldwell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from
Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 10 June 2019
Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three
Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim
California.
Teaching Experience:
UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science
100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on
the health effects of environmental contaminants.
National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Sante Fe, New
Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage
tanks.
National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1,
2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.
California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San
Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.
UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation
Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.
University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry,
Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.
U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.
Academic Grants Awarded:
California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.
Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.
Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.
Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.
King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of
Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on
VOC emissions. 1998.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of
polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.
James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered
Poplar trees with resistance to round-up. 1996.
United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the
Tahoe National Forest. 1995.
Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts
in West Indies. 1993
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 10 June 2019
Deposition and/or Trial Testimony:
In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey
Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant.
Case No.: 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition. 6-7-2019
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division
M/T Carla Maersk, Plaintiffs, vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS “Conti Perdido”
Defendant.
Case No.: 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237
Rosenfeld Deposition. 5-9-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
Carole-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC615636
Rosenfeld Deposition, 1-26-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC646857
Rosenfeld Deposition, 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19
In United States District Court For The District of Colorado
Bells et al. Plaintiff vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants
Case: No 1:16-cv-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition, 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018
In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 112th Judicial District
Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants
Cause No 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-17-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa
Simons et al., Plaintiffs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants
Cause No C12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-20-2017
In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois
Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-23-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles
Warrn Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC
Case No.: LC102019 (c/w BC582154)
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018
In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division
Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2017
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 10 June 2019
In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish
Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 13-2-03987-5
Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017
Trial, March 2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda
Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants
Case No.: RG14711115
Rosenfeld Deposition, September 2015
In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants
Case No.: LALA002187
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Jerry Dovico, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Valley View Sine LLC, et al., Defendants
Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Doug Pauls, et al.,, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Richard Warren, et al., Defendants
Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia
Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al.
Civil Action N0. 14-C-30000
Rosenfeld Deposition, June 2015
In The Third Judicial District County of Dona Ana, New Mexico
Betty Gonzalez, et al. Plaintiffs vs. Del Oro Dairy, Del Oro Real Estate LLC, Jerry Settles and Deward
DeRuyter, Defendants
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Muscatine County
Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant
Case No 4980
Rosenfeld Deposition: May 2015
In the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida
Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant.
Case Number CACE07030358 (26)
Rosenfeld Deposition: December 2014
In the United States District Court Western District of Oklahoma
Tommy McCarty, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Oklahoma City Landfill, LLC d/b/a Southeast Oklahoma City
Landfill, et al. Defendants.
Case No. 5:12-cv-01152-C
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2014
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 10 June 2019
In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.
Case Number cc-11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987)
Rosenfeld Deposition: October 2012
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division
Kyle Cannon, Eugene Donovan, Genaro Ramirez, Carol Sassler, and Harvey Walton, each Individually and
on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. BP Products North America, Inc., Defendant.
Case 3:10-cv-00622
Rosenfeld Deposition: February 2012
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2013
In the Circuit Court of Baltimore County Maryland
Philip E. Cvach, II et al., Plaintiffs vs. Two Farms, Inc. d/b/a Royal Farms, Defendants
Case Number: 03-C-12-012487 OT
Rosenfeld Deposition: September 2013
EXHIBIT C
1640 5th St.., Suite 204 Santa
Santa Monica, California 90401
Tel: (949) 887‐9013
Email: mhagemann@swape.com
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
CEQA Review
Education:
M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984.
B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 1982.
Professional Certifications:
California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:
Matt has 25 years of experience in environmental policy, assessment and remediation. He spent nine
years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science
Policy Advisor in the Western Regional Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from
perchlorate and MTBE. While with EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of
the assessment of seven major military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement
actions under provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) while also working
with permit holders to improve hydrogeologic characterization and water quality monitoring.
Matt has worked closely with U.S. EPA legal counsel and the technical staff of several states in the
application and enforcement of RCRA, Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act regulations. Matt
has trained the technical staff in the States of California, Hawaii, Nevada, Arizona and the Territory of
Guam in the conduct of investigations, groundwater fundamentals, and sampling techniques.
Positions Matt has held include:
•Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 – present);
•Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 – 2014;
•Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 ‐‐ 2003);
• Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001 – 2004);
• Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989–
1998);
• Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 – 2000);
• Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 –
1998);
• Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990 – 1995);
• Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986 – 1998); and
• Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984 – 1986).
Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:
With SWAPE, Matt’s responsibilities have included:
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 100 environmental impact reports
since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard to hazardous waste, water
resources, water quality, air quality, Valley Fever, greenhouse gas emissions, and geologic
hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead agencies at the
local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks and
implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from toxins
and Valley Fever.
• Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at industrial facilities.
• Manager of a project to provide technical assistance to a community adjacent to a former
Naval shipyard under a grant from the U.S. EPA.
• Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns.
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications
for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission.
• Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S.
• Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in
Southern California drinking water wells.
• Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the
review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas
stations throughout California.
• Expert witness on two cases involving MTBE litigation.
• Expert witness and litigation support on the impact of air toxins and hazards at a school.
• Expert witness in litigation at a former plywood plant.
With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt’s duties included the following:
• Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony
by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking
water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony
against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies.
• Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by
MTBE in California and New York.
2
• Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production‐related contamination in Mississippi.
• Lead author for a multi‐volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los
Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines.
3
• Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with
clients and regulators.
Executive Director:
As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange
County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of
wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange
County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection
of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the
development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the
discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including
Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business
institutions including the Orange County Business Council.
Hydrogeology:
As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to
characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point
Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army
Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
• Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of
monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and
groundwater.
• Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory
analysis at military bases.
• Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation
development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.
At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of
groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to
show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and
County of Maui.
As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the
Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included
the following:
• Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for
the protection of drinking water.
• Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities
through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports,
conducted public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very
concerned about the impact of designation.
4
• Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments,
including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water
transfer.
Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
• Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance
with Subtitle C requirements.
• Reviewed and wrote ʺpart Bʺ permits for the disposal of hazardous waste.
• Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed
the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.
EPA legal counsel.
• Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor’s investigations of waste sites.
With the National Park Service, Matt directed service‐wide investigations of contaminant sources to
prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
• Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the
Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants.
• Conducted watershed‐scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and
Olympic National Park.
• Identified high‐levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico
and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA.
• Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a
national workgroup.
• Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while
serving on a national workgroup.
• Co‐authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal
watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation‐
wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks.
• Contributed to the Federal Multi‐Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water
Action Plan.
Policy:
Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 9. Activities included the following:
• Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the
potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking
water supplies.
• Shaped EPA’s national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing
to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in
Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
• Improved the technical training of EPAʹs scientific and engineering staff.
• Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region’s 300 scientists and engineers in
negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific
principles into the policy‐making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents.
5
Geology:
With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for
timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
• Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical
models to determine slope stability.
• Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource
protection.
• Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the
city of Medford, Oregon.
As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later
listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern
Oregon. Duties included the following:
• Supervised year‐long effort for soil and groundwater sampling.
• Conducted aquifer tests.
• Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.
Teaching:
From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university
levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in
environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater
contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students.
• Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.
Matt taught physical geology (lecture and lab and introductory geology at Golden West College in
Huntington Beach, California from 2010 to 2014.
Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public
Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.
EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.
Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and
Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las
Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at
schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.
6
Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE
Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.
Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater
Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust,
Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy
of Sciences, Irvine, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water
Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter‐Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.
Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited
presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of
the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a
meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address
Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental
Journalists.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater
(and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage
Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and
State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished
report.
7
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.
Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks. Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential Water Quality Concerns Related
to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft
Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright
Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.
Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air
Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.
Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic
Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui,
October 1996.
Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu,
Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air
and Waste Management Association Publication VIP‐61.
Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Characterization and Cleanup a t Closing Military Bases
in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater
Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of
Groundwater.
Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL‐
contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
8
Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of
Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.
Other Experience:
Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examination, 2009‐
2011.
9
EXHIBIT E
P: (626) 381-9248
F: (626) 389-5414
E: info@mitchtsailaw.com
Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorney At Law
139 South Hudson Avenue
Suite 200
Pasadena, California 91101
VIA E-MAIL
March 22, 2022
Tania Flores, Planning Commission Secretary,
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Em: tflores@laquintaca.gov
Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Em: consultingplanner@laquintaca.gov
RE: March 22, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting, Agenda Public Hearing
No. 1; Regarding the Coral Mountain Resort Final Environmental
Impact Report (SCH #2021020310)
Dear Tania Flores and Nicole Sauviat Criste,
On behalf of the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (“Southwest
Carpenters”), my Office is submitting these comments on the City of La Quinta’s
(“City” or “Lead Agency”) March 22, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting, Agenda
Public Hearing No. 1 regarding the Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”)
(SCH No. 2021020310) for the proposed Coral Mountain Resort Project (“Project”).
The City proposes to adopt the Project, carving out 386 acres of a 929-acre area of
the City, to promote future development of the Coral Mountain Resort. The Project
would allow for the development of 600 residential units, a 150-room resort hotel
plus complementary uses and amenities, a recreational surf facility, 57,000 square feet
of commercial development, 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses,
and 23.6 acres of recreational uses. As part of the Project, the City would initiate a
general plan amendment and zoning change to designate the Project area for “Tourist
Commercial” uses; a specific plan amendment to exclude the Project area from a
previous specific plan; the adoption of the Project’s specific plan; the adoption of a
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 2 of 25
tentative tract map; site development permits; and the adoption of a development
agreement with the Project applicant.
Southwest Carpenters is a labor union representing more than 50,000 union
carpenters in six states and has a strong interest in well-ordered land use planning and
addressing the environmental impacts of development projects.
Individual members of the Southwest Carpenters live, work, and recreate in the City
and surrounding communities and would be directly affected by the Project’s
environmental impacts.
Southwest Carpenters expressly reserve the right to supplement these comments at or
prior to hearings on the Project, and at any later hearings and proceedings related to
this Project. Cal. Gov. Code § 65009(b); Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21177(a); Bakersfield
Citizens for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 1184, 1199-1203; see
Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Water Dist. (1997) 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121.
Southwest Carpenters incorporate by reference all comments raising issues regarding
the EIR submitted prior to certification of the EIR for the Project. Citizens for Clean
Energy v City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal. App. 4th 173, 191 (finding that any party who
has objected to the Project’s environmental documentation may assert any issue
timely raised by other parties); Including Letter from Mitchell Tsai dated August 5
2021 re. Draft Environmental Impact Report Comments; hereby attached and
incorporated by reference as (Exhibit D).
Moreover, Southwest Carpenters request that the Lead Agency provide notice for any
and all notices referring or related to the Project issued under the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Cal Public Resources Code (“PRC”) § 21000
et seq, and the California Planning and Zoning Law (“Planning and Zoning Law”),
Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 65000–65010. California Public Resources Code Sections 21092.2,
and 21167(f) and Government Code Section 65092 require agencies to mail such
notices to any person who has filed a written request for them with the clerk of the
agency’s governing body.
The City should require the Applicant provide additional community benefits such as
requiring local hire and use of a skilled and trained workforce to build the Project.
The City should require the use of workers who have graduated from a Joint Labor
Management apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California, or
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 3 of 25
have at least as many hours of on-the-job experience in the applicable craft which
would be required to graduate from such a state approved apprenticeship training
program or who are registered apprentices in an apprenticeship training program
approved by the State of California.
Community benefits such as local hire and skilled and trained workforce requirements
can also be helpful to reduce environmental impacts and improve the positive
economic impact of the Project. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain
percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the
length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized
economic benefits. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of
workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of
vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic
benefits. As environmental consultants Matt Hagemann and Paul E. Rosenfeld note:
[A]ny local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length
from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of
construction-related GHG emissions, though the significance of the
reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the
project site.
March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and
Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling.
Skilled and trained workforce requirements promote the development of skilled trades
that yield sustainable economic development. As the California Workforce
Development Board and the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
concluded:
. . . labor should be considered an investment rather than a cost – and
investments in growing, diversifying, and upskilling California’s workforce
can positively affect returns on climate mitigation efforts. In other words,
well trained workers are key to delivering emissions reductions and
moving California closer to its climate targets.1
1 California Workforce Development Board (2020) Putting California on the High Road: A Jobs and Climate Action
Plan for 2030 at p. ii, available at https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Putting-California-on-
the-High-Road.pdf
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 4 of 25
On May 7, 2021, the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that that the
“[u]se of a local state-certified apprenticeship program or a skilled and trained
workforce with a local hire component” can result in air pollutant reductions.2
Cities are increasingly adopting local skilled and trained workforce policies and
requirements into general plans and municipal codes. For example, the City of
Hayward 2040 General Plan requires the City to “promote local hiring . . . to help
achieve a more positive jobs-housing balance, and reduce regional commuting, gas
consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions.”3
In fact, the City of Hayward has gone as far as to adopt a Skilled Labor Force policy
into its Downtown Specific Plan and municipal code, requiring developments in its
Downtown area to requiring that the City “[c]ontribute to the stabilization of regional
construction markets by spurring applicants of housing and nonresidential
developments to require contractors to utilize apprentices from state-approved, joint
labor-management training programs, . . .”4 In addition, the City of Hayward requires
all projects 30,000 square feet or larger to “utilize apprentices from state-approved,
joint labor-management training programs.”5
Locating jobs closer to residential areas can have significant environmental benefits.
As the California Planning Roundtable noted in 2008:
People who live and work in the same jurisdiction would be more likely
to take transit, walk, or bicycle to work than residents of less balanced
communities and their vehicle trips would be shorter. Benefits would
include potential reductions in both vehicle miles traveled and vehicle
hours traveled.6
2 South Coast Air Quality Management District (May 7, 2021) Certify Final Environmental Assessment and Adopt
Proposed Rule 2305 – Warehouse Indirect Source Rule – Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions
Program, and Proposed Rule 316 – Fees for Rule 2305, Submit Rule 2305 for Inclusion Into the SIP, and Approve
Supporting Budget Actions, available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/Governing-
Board/2021/2021-May7-027.pdf?sfvrsn=10
3 City of Hayward (2014) Hayward 2040 General Plan Policy Document at p. 3 -99, available at https://www.hayward-
ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/General Plan FINAL.pdf .
4 City of Hayward (2019) Hayward Downtown Specific Plan at p. 5-24, available at https://www.hayward-
ca.gov/sites/default/files/Hayward%20Downtown%
20Specific%20Plan.pdf.
5 City of Hayward Municipal Code, Chapter 10, § 28.5.3.020(C).
6 California Planning Roundtable (2008) Deconstructing Jobs-Housing Balance at p. 6, available at
https://cproundtable.org/static/media/uploads/publications/cpr-jobs-housing.pdf
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 5 of 25
In addition, local hire mandates as well as skill training are critical facets of a strategy
to reduce vehicle miles traveled. As planning experts Robert Cervero and Michael
Duncan noted, simply placing jobs near housing stock is insufficient to achieve VMT
reductions since the skill requirements of available local jobs must be matched to
those held by local residents.7 Some municipalities have tied local hire and skilled and
trained workforce policies to local development permits to address transportation
issues. As Cervero and Duncan note:
In nearly built-out Berkeley, CA, the approach to balancing jobs and
housing is to create local jobs rather than to develop new housing.” The
city’s First Source program encourages businesses to hire local residents,
especially for entry- and intermediate-level jobs, and sponsors vocational
training to ensure residents are employment-ready. While the program is
voluntary, some 300 businesses have used it to date, placing more than
3,000 city residents in local jobs since it was launched in 1986. When
needed, these carrots are matched by sticks, since the city is not shy about
negotiating corporate participation in First Source as a condition of
approval for development permits.
The City should consider utilizing skilled and trained workforce policies and
requirements to benefit the local area economically and mitigate greenhouse gas, air
quality and transportation impacts.
The City should also require the Project to be built to standards exceeding the current
2019 California Green Building Code to mitigate the Project’s environmental impacts
and to advance progress towards the State of California’s environmental goals.
I. THE PROJECT WOULD BE APPROVED IN VIOLATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
A. Background Concerning the California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA has two basic purposes. First, CEQA is designed to inform decision makers
and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project. 14
7 Cervero, Robert and Duncan, Michael (2006) Which Reduces Vehicle Travel More: Jobs-Housing Balance or Retail-
Housing Mixing? Journal of the American Planning Association 72 (4), 475-490, 482, available at
http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/UTCT-825.pdf.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 6 of 25
California Code of Regulations (“CCR” or “CEQA Guidelines”) § 15002(a)(1).8 “Its
purpose is to inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental
consequences of their decisions before they are made. Thus, the EIR ‘protects not only
the environment but also informed self-government.’ [Citation.]” Citizens of Goleta
Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 553, 564. The EIR has been described as
“an environmental ‘alarm bell’ whose purpose it is to alert the public and its
responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached ecological
points of no return.” Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay v. Bd. of Port Comm’rs. (2001) 91 Cal.
App. 4th 1344, 1354 (“Berkeley Jets”); County of Inyo v. Yorty (1973) 32 Cal. App. 3d 795,
810.
Second, CEQA directs public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage
when possible by requiring alternatives or mitigation measures. CEQA Guidelines §
15002(a)(2) and (3). See also, Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal. App. 4th 1344, 1354; Citizens of Goleta
Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553; Laurel Heights Improvement Ass’n v.
Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 400. The EIR serves to
provide public agencies and the public in general with information about the effect
that a proposed project is likely to have on the environment and to “identify ways that
environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced.” CEQA Guidelines §
15002(a)(2). If the project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may
approve the project only upon finding that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened
all significant effects on the environment where feasible” and that any unavoidable
significant effects on the environment are “acceptable due to overriding concerns”
specified in CEQA section 21081. CEQA Guidelines § 15092(b)(2)(A–B).
While the courts review an EIR using an “abuse of discretion” standard, “the
reviewing court is not to ‘uncritically rely on every study or analysis presented by a
project proponent in support of its position.’ A ‘clearly inadequate or unsupported
study is entitled to no judicial deference.’” Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1355
(emphasis added) (quoting Laurel Heights, 47 Cal.3d at 391, 409 fn. 12). Drawing this
line and determining whether the EIR complies with CEQA’s information disclosure
requirements presents a question of law subject to independent review by the courts.
8 The CEQA Guidelines, codified in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, section 150000 et seq, are regulatory
guidelines promulgated by the state Natural Resources Agency for the implementation of CEQA. (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §
21083.) The CEQA Guidelines are given “great weight in interpreting CEQA except when . . . clearly unauthorized or
erroneous.” Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal. 4th 204, 217.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 7 of 25
Sierra Club v. Cnty. of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal. 5th 502, 515; Madera Oversight Coalition, Inc. v.
County of Madera (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 48, 102, 131. As the court stated in Berkeley
Jets, 91 Cal. App. 4th at 1355:
A prejudicial abuse of discretion occurs “if the failure to include relevant
information precludes informed decision-making and informed public
participation, thereby thwarting the statutory goals of the EIR process.
The preparation and circulation of an EIR is more than a set of technical hurdles for
agencies and developers to overcome. The EIR’s function is to ensure that
government officials who decide to build or approve a project do so with a full
understanding of the environmental consequences and, equally important, that the
public is assured those consequences have been considered. For the EIR to serve
these goals it must present information so that the foreseeable impacts of pursuing
the project can be understood and weighed, and the public must be given an adequate
opportunity to comment on that presentation before the decision to go forward is
made. Communities for a Better Environment v. Richmond (2010) 184 Cal. App. 4th 70, 80
(quoting Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007)
40 Cal.4th 412, 449–450).
II. NEW INFORMATION THAT SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE
SEVERITY OF THE PROJECT’S IMPACTS ON PROTECTED
WILDLIFE REQUIRE RECIRCULATION OF THE FEIR
A. CEQA Requires Revision and Recirculation of an Environmental Impact
Report When Substantial Changes or New Information Comes to Light
CEQA requires that a Project’s environmental documents be revised and recirculated
to the public when significant new information is added to an environmental impact
report prior to certification.
Section 21092.1 of the California Public Resources Code requires that “[w]hen
significant new information is added to an environmental impact report after notice
has been given pursuant to Section 21092 … but prior to certification, the public
agency shall give notice again pursuant to Section 21092, and consult again pursuant
to Sections 21104 and 21153 before certifying the environmental impact report” in
order to give the public a chance to review and comment upon the information.
CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5. (See also 14 Cal. Code of Regulations § 15088.5.)
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 8 of 25
Revisions to environmental analysis in an environmental impact report requires
recirculation of the environmental impact report to give the public a meaningful
opportunity to comment. (Gray v. Cty. of Madera (2008)167 Cal. App. 4th 1099, 1121 –
22.)
Significant new information includes “changes in the project or environmental
setting as well as additional data or other information” that “deprives the public of a
meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect
of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a
feasible project alternative).” CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5(a).
Examples of significant new information requiring recirculation include “new
significant environmental impacts from the project or from a new mitigation
measure,” “substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact,” “feasible
project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others
previously analyzed” as well as when “the draft EIR was so fundamentally and
basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and
comment were precluded.” Id.
An agency has an obligation to recirculate an environmental impact report for public
notice and comment due to “significant new information” regardless of whether the
agency opts to include it in a project’s environmental impact report. Cadiz Land Co. v.
Rail Cycle (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 74, 95 [finding that in light of a new expert report
disclosing potentially significant impacts to groundwater supply “the EIR should have
been revised and recirculated for purposes of informing the public and governmental
agencies of the volume of groundwater at risk and to allow the public and
governmental agencies to respond to such information.”]. If significant new
information was brought to the attention of an agency prior to certification, an agency
is required to revise and recirculate that information as part of the environmental
impact report.
Where an agency " omits an adequate discussion of a project's potential impacts in its
EIR, it cannot afterward 'make up for the lack of analysis in the EIR' through post-
EIR analysis." Sierra Watch v. County of Placer (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 86, 103 (citing
Save our Peninsula Committee v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors (2001) 87
Cal.App.4th 99, 130 (project information revealed in an errata shortly before project
approval "does not make up for the lack of analysis in the EIR").) To allow otherwise
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 9 of 25
would "deny the public 'an opportunity to test, assess, and evaluate the [newly
revealed information] and make an informed judgment as to the validity of the
conclusions to be drawn"' from it. Sierra Watch, supra, 69 Cal. App.5th at 103,
internal citation omitted.
B. The FEIR Significantly Revises the Project’s DEIR, Adding Mitigation
Measures to Reduce the Project’s Potentially Significant Impacts on
Biological Resources Relating to the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep
Since circulation of the DEIR, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(“CDFW”) comments show for the first time that the Project results in a new and
significantly more severe environmental impact:
“The proposed Project occurs in Essential Habitat for Peninsular
bighorn sheep (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000) and has the
potential to impact Peninsular bighorn sheep a federally
endangered species (Fed. Register, Vol. 63, No. 52, 1998) and a
State endangered and California Fully Protected species (Calif. Dep.
Fish and Game 1992), and a Covered Species under CVMSHCP.
The DEIR incorrectly identifies that “this species [PBS] is not
present at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat” (page
231)” (FEIR, p. 2-78)
Specifically, the CDFW explained that the Project’s artificial water sources such as The
Wave, may result in an attractive nuisance, luring the Sheep into the Project Site:
“In the City of La Quinta, existing developments (including
SilverRock, PGA West, and The Quarry at La Quinta) along the
wildland‐urban interface have become attractive nuisances for
sheep because of artificial features that attract sheep, for example
grass and artificial water sources. This results in sheep habituated
to urban environments, and can lead to increased mortality risk
through transmission of disease, ingestion of toxic materials,
vehicle strikes, and drowning in artificial water sources. These
developments are adjacent to Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat in
the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area of
the CVMSHCP. As a result of these issues, the MSHCP
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 10 of 25
requirement for building a fence at this interface was triggered and
the City of La Quinta is currently working with the Coachella Valley
Conservation Commission to build a sheep fence. CDFW is
concerned that this Project will create similar conditions and
become an attractive nuisance to sheep that currently use Coral
Mountain. Further, once the fence is built to exclude sheep in other
areas of La Quinta the sheep may migrate to this Project site if it
has attractive features. The revised DEIR should identify and
implement specific measures, such as fencing, to keep sheep out of
urban areas and prevent trespass of humans and domestic animals
into adjacent sheep habitat. (emphasis added)” (FEIR, p. 2-79)
In light of this new information, and “[t]o ensure that PBS do not enter the project
site, an 8‐foot high sheep barrier is proposed.” (FEIR, p. 3-6)
The City addressed CDFW’s new information stating that “[t]he project will avoid this
potential impact because the Specific Plan has been modified to include a requirement
to construct an 8‐foot‐high sheep barrier/perimeter fence that will be designed to
exclude PBS from the project site” (FEIR, p. 2-73)
Since the Project’s artificial water sources’ significant impact on the Peninsular
bighorn sheep as well as its mitigation measures, including the fence barrier, were not
mentioned on the DEIR and therefore not available to the Public and decisionmakers,
the FEIR should be recirculated.
C. The FEIR Improperly Labels the Peninsular Sheep Barrier Fence
Mitigation Measures as Project Design Feature and General Project
Conditions
The FEIR improperly labels the mitigation measures as Project Design Features, and
General Project Condition, which the FEIR purports will reduce environmental
impacts by preventing the Peninsular bighorn sheep from being attracted to the
Project Site’s artificial water sources. (FEIR, pp. 2-76; 3-6)
The FEIR’s biological resources conclusions regarding mitigation of environmental
impacts below levels of significance rely on the implementation of these project
conditions, and that as such no additional mitigation is required because “[t]his
requirement will be incorporated into the Specific Plan and made enforceable through
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 11 of 25
the project Development Agreement and/or conditions of approval.” (FEIR, p. 2-87)
and that they are “made enforceable through the project Development Agreement”
(FEIR 2-80) or “along with the addition of project design features (the sheep
barrier/fence and compliance with adjacency guidelines)” (FEIR 2-83)
However, it is established that “’[a]voidance, minimization and / or mitigation
measure’ . . . are not ‘part of the project.’ . . . compressing the analysis of impacts and
mitigation measures into a single issue . . disregards the requirements of CEQA.”
(Lotus v. Department of Transportation (2014) 223 Cal. App. 4th 645, 656.)
When “an agency decides to incorporate mitigation measures into its significance
determination, and relies on those mitigation measures to determine that no
significant effects will occur, that agency must treat those measures as though there
were adopted following a finding of significance.” (Lotus, supra, 223 Cal. App. 4th at
652 [citing CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1) and Cal. Public Resources Code §
21081(a)(1).])
By labeling mitigation measures as project design features, the City violates CEQA by
failing to disclose “the analytic route that the agency took from the evidence to its
findings.” (Cal. Public Resources Code § 21081.5; CEQA Guidelines § 15093; Village
Laguna of Laguna Beach, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1982) 134 Cal. App. 3d 1022, 1035
[quoting Topanga Assn for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal. 3d
506, 515.])
The DEIR’s use of “Project Design Features” further violates CEQA because such
measures would not be included in the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program CEQA requires lead agencies to adopt mitigation measures that are fully
enforceable and to adopt a monitoring and/or reporting program to ensure that the
measures are implemented to reduce the Project’s significant environmental effects to
the extent feasible. (PRC § 21081.6; CEQA Guidelines § 15091(d).)
Though they are presumably enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of the
Project’s Development Agreement, the fence barrier condition to reduce impacts on
protected wildlife should be properly adopted as mitigation and subject to a mitigation
monitoring and reporting program under CEQA.
Therefore, the FEIR should be revised and recirculated once the mitigation measures
are adopted and subject to the mitigation monitoring and reporting program.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 12 of 25
D. The FEIR Significantly Revises the Project’s DEIR, Adding Extensive
Mitigation Measures to Reduce the Biological Resources Impacts, Which
It Improperly Labels as Avoidance and Minimization Measures
In response to CDFW comments, in addition to the barrier fence, the FEIR proposes
a series of mitigation measures mislabeled as “Avoidance and Minimization Measures
and Land Use Adjacency Guidelines in the project conditions of approval” (FEIR, p.
2-87).
The measures addressing CDFW request include:
“1. A biological survey and assessment of year‐round habitat use by
Peninsular sheep will be conducted by a qualified biologist, pre‐approved
by CDFW, prior to Project approval.
2. All recreational infrastructure and activities such as trails, rope courses,
and zipline(s) shall be contained within the development footprint. Trails
and other recreational activities will not lead into or encourage use of
adjacent natural areas.
3. No plant species toxic to bighorn sheep, such as oleander (Nerium
oleander), lantana (Lantana sp.) and laurel cherry (Prunus sp.), shall be
used for landscaping within or around the development. Control and do
not plant non‐native vegetation, including grass, in the development
where it may attract or concentrate bighorn sheep or invade and degrade
bighorn sheep habitat (e.g., tamarisk, fountain grass). Use native
vegetation in the development landscaping. Along fenced sections of the
urban interface, ornamental and toxic plants should not extend over or
through fences where they may be accessible to browsing bighorn sheep.
The Project will use Table 4‐112: Coachella Valley Native Plants
Recommended for Landscaping of the CVMSHCP as guidance on a
landscaping planting palette.
4. To prevent sheep from entering the Project site or human intrusion into
sheep habitat, fences will be placed along the western boundary of PA II
and PA III including III‐G (DEIR Exhibit 1.2, pg. 1‐8), and PA IV; and
the southern edge of PA II, PA III, and PA IV development site (Figure
2). A fencing plan and further avoidance and minimization measure shall
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 13 of 25
be developed in coordination with the Wildlife Agencies. Fences should
be functionally equivalent or better than fencing designs in the Recovery
Plan, which are describes as 2.4 meters (8 feet) high and should not
contain gaps in which bighorn sheep can be entangled. Gaps should be 11
centimeters (4.3 inches) or less.
5. Intentional enticement of bighorn sheep onto private property shall be
prohibited and enforced using fines if necessary, including vegetation,
mineral licks, or unfenced swimming pools, ponds, or fountains upon
which bighorn sheep may become dependent for water.
6. Construction of water bodies that may promote the breeding of midges
(Culicoides sp.) shall be prohibited. Water features should be designed to
eliminate blue‐tongue and other vector‐borne diseases by providing
deeper water (over 0.9 meters [3 feet]), steeper slopes (greater than 30
degrees), and if possible, rapidly fluctuating water levels, or other current
best practices. As needed, coordinate with local mosquito and vector
control district to ensure management of existing water bodies that may
harbor vector species.
7. An educational program about the Peninsular bighorn sheep and their
associated habitat shall be implemented and maintained throughout the
resort, open space, and low‐density community programs through the use
of signage, pamphlets, and staff education. The Education Program
should inform the reason of why specific measures are being taken to
support recovery of Peninsular bighorn sheep. The Education Program
should include the ecology of Peninsular bighorn sheep, what threats this
species is currently facing, and how recovery actions will reduce these
threats. This includes information that explains : (1) why restrictions on
toxic plants, fences, and pesticides are needed; (2) how artificial feeding of
coyotes could adversely affect bighorn sheep; and (3) how recreational
activities may affect sheep. The use of interpretive signs is encouraged.
8. Ensure funding for implementation, enforcement, and effectiveness
assessment of the above measures, for the life of the development, to help
ensure protection of sheep and to prevent trespass from the Project site
into adjacent sheep habitat.” (FEIR, p. 2-84)
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 14 of 25
Further, “CDFW recommends that inclusion of biological mitigation measures for
sheep that identify funding and resources for enforcing trail use rules which could
include signage, enforcement, public education, and removal of unauthorized trails.
Most of these measures will require enforcement to ensure they are enacted and
properly followed throughout the life of the Project. The trails, rope courses, and
zipline may create an easy and tempting access point for the residents into the open
space areas. Without enforcement of trail use rules within the Project’s open space the
adjacent habitat, Coral Mountain could become saturated with unauthorized trails.
Measures such as leash laws, Covenants, Conditions and Restriction for invasive
plants and pets, trail regulations, and fencing requirements require constant
enforcement.” (FEIR, p. 2-82)
Therefore, the FEIR should be revised and recirculated to include these mitigation
measures adopted.
E. The FEIR Significantly Revises the Project’s DEIR, Adding Mitigation
Measures to Reduce the Project’s Significant Impacts on Roosting Bats,
Burrowing Owls, Nesting Birds and other Protected Wildlife.
To further reduce the Project’s impact on the newly provided impacts on wildlife, the
FEIR provided new analyses and mitigation measures to reduce the light and noise
impact on these animals, “[w]ith the implementation of this revised mitigation
measure, potential impacts to bats and other wildlife species are reduced to less than
significant levels.” (FEIR, p. 2-15)
Therefore, “all project lighting will be required to be shielded and directed to avoid
light spillage onto Coral Mountain (see Mitigation Measure BIO‐4). In addition, the
lighting system analysis conducted for the project demonstrates that there will be no
light spillage outside the Wave Basin planning area, including toward Coral Mountain
or other BLM open space. This is described in more detail in the Light and Glare
Topical Response in Section 2.2.1 of this Final EIR” (FEIR, p. 2-76)
Also, “in order to assure that no impact to wildlife utilizing Coral Mountain occurs
during the construction period, Mitigation Measure BIO‐7 is included. BIO‐7 requires
noise monitoring to occur for all construction activities using heavy equipment within
150 feet of the base of Coral Mountain. The highest projected operational noise levels
is 64.5 dBA at location P‐10 in the tourist commercial portion of the site next to the
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 15 of 25
hotel and Wave Basin (see Table 4.11‐25, Daytime Project Operational Noise Levels
and Exhibit 4.11‐2, Noise Source and Receiver Locations). Accordingly, the project
will not exceed the CVMSHCP Land Use Adjacency Guidelines for noise levels at
Coral Mountain.” (FEIR, p. 3-8)
Absent these light and noise mitigation measures, the Project would have a significant
impact on the roosting Bats, burrowing owls and other wildlife. Therefore, in light of
the new mitigation measures adopted to reduce the Project’s Light and Noise impacts
on bats, the FEIR should be recirculated.
III. THE WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE
IT FAILS TO PROPERLY ANALYZE AND MITIGATE THE
PROJECT-SPECIFIC WATER SUPPLY IMPACTS PURSUANT TO
STATE AND LOCAL STATUTORY STANDARDS
A. Background on Water Supply Assessments Statutory Requirements
A Water Supply Assessment (“WSA”) is an analysis of the availability of water to serve
the project in addition to existing and planned future uses.
In 2001, California legislature passed SB 221 and SB 610, known collectively as the
“show me the water bills” which increased the information requirements for water
supply assessments and ensured that “the water requirements [were] met before
subdivision construction actually [began].” (Wat.Code, § 10910)
SB 221 added additional requirements for water suppliers who use groundwater,
requiring local agencies to demonstrate that a proposed project has sufficient water
supply. (Wat.Code, § 66473.7) and directing cities and counties disapprove projects
when the water supply assessment failed to comply with the statutory requirements
Pursuant to Pub. Resources Code, § 21151.9; CEQA requires compliance with Water
Code sections 10910 to 10912, originally enacted in 1995 but substantially amended by
SB 610 in 2001.
The above provisions apply broadly to certain CEQA Projects (Wat.Code, §§ 10910,
subd. (a), 10912, subds. (a), (b).) Pursuant to SB 610, these Projects must provide:
1. A detailed description of the available water supply for planned future
uses during certain water year types (Wat.Code, § 10631(g));
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 16 of 25
2. Inclusion of any water supply entitlements for the proposed project
that indicate the amount of water received in previous years.
(Wat.Code, § 10910(d)(1))
3. Requirement for planning officials to identify groundwater as an
existing or planned water source for a proposed project. (Wat.Code, §
10631(b))
Also, the Water Code requires the city or county considering a project to obtain, at the
outset of the CEQA process, a water supply “assessment” from the applicable public
water system. (Wat.Code, § 10910, subd. (b).) The “water supply asse ssment” is then to
be included in any CEQA document the city or county prepares for the project.
(Wat.Code, § 10911, subd. (b).)
In accordance with Water Code Section 10912, as adopted by SB 610, projects subject
to the requirement for a WSA include:
• A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units.
• A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing
more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of
floor space.
• A proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000
persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space.
• A proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms.
• A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or
industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying
more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet
of floor area.
• A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the projects specified
in Water Code Section 10912.
• A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or
greater than, the amount of water required by a 500 dwelling unit
project.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 17 of 25
B. The Project Violates the California Water Code, CEQA Guidelines and
the ‘Show Me The Water Bills’ Because It Fails to Provide the Required
Water Verification Letter
The DEIR states that “[t]his document provides verification that adequate water supply
for this Project is available, as required by California Government Code Section 66473.7.
[emphasis added]” (DEIR, App. M, p. 61) However, adequate does not mean sufficient.
According to the ‘show me the water bills,’ the Project is required to prepare a Water
Supply Verification (“WSV”) letter showing that adequate water supplies will be
available for that project as well as other existing and planned future uses for a projected
20–year period. (Water Code Sections 65867.5, 66455.3 and 66473.7)
The California Water Code 10910 requires that a WSA be completed to ensure that
adequate supplies are available to meet the demands of proposed projects. In addition,
the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code 66473.7) also requires the preparation of
a Water Supply Verification (WSV) for proposed subdivisions.
A verification letter must be prepared pursuant to the statutes, a one-liner at the bottom
of another document would not suffice.
Therefore, the EIR’s omission of the required water verification letter violates the Water
Code and CEQA Guidelines
C. The Water Supply Assessment is Inadequate Because It Violates the
Coachella Valley Water District’s Landscape and Irrigation System
Design Criteria Ordinance
The Water Supply Assessment prepared for the Project is deficient because it fails to
Properly analyze Project-specific water demands as well as mitigate the Project’s
potential impacts to the local and regional water supply
The FEIR fails to properly evaluate the Project’s water demands Pursuant to the
Coachella Valley Water District’s (“CVWD”) Landscape and Irrigation System Design
Criteria Ordinance;9 which provides specific guidelines and requirements that must be
met when estimating a Project’s water demand.
The Project’s Water Supply Assessment specifically states that it failed to determine
whether “the Project is meeting the MAWA established in CVWD’s Landscape
9 Available at, https://www.cvwd.org/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/463
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 18 of 25
Ordinance or other applicable regulations; such an analysis is beyond the scope of
this WSA/WSV. [Emphasis Added]” (DEIR, App. M, p. 23)
In Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova, the court
stated that “the FEIR's use of inconsistent supply and demand figures, and its failure
to explain how those figures match up, results in a lack of substantial evidence that
new surface water diversions are likely to supply the project's long-term needs.”
Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40
Cal.4th 412; as modified (Apr. 18, 2007)
Concluding that “CEQA entitles the decision makers and the public to a legally
proper procedure and to a clearer, more coherent and consistent explanation of how,
given the competing demands expected to arise for new water supplies, water is to be
provided to the project.”(Ibid at p. 447)
Therefore, the FEIR should be recirculated to properly analyze whether the Project’s
Water Demands Exceed the Maximum Applied Water Allowance set forth on the
Coachella Valley Water District’s Landscape and Irrigation System Design Criteria
Ordinance.
1. The Maximum Applied Water Allowance is Underestimated Because It Was
Calculated Using an Inaccurate Reference Evapotranspiration Adjustment Factor for
Recreational Water Features Within Special Landscape Areas
According to the Coachella Valley Water District’s the Estimated Total Water Use shall
not exceed the Maximum Applied Water Allowance (“MAWA”). MAWA is based upon
the area's reference evapotranspiration, ET adjustment factor, and the size of the
landscaped area. Special Landscape Areas, including recreation areas are subject to the
MAWA with an ET AF not to exceed 1. (Coachella Valley Water District’s Landscape
and Irrigation System Design Criteria, p. 7)10See also, (California Code of Regulations,
Title 23, Division 2, Chapter 7, Section 491, Subsection mm)
The DEIR states that “Outdoor water feature demand for the Project is based on the
ETWU equation of the CVWD’s Landscape Ordinance No. 1302.4. The equation uses
the estimated area in square feet, a reference ETo rate of 64.22 inches per year (CVWD
10 Ibid.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 19 of 25
Zone 3), and a Plant Factor of 1.10 for a stationary body of water, and 1.20 for a moving
body of water.” (DEIR, App. M, p. 22)
Since the Wave is a special recreation landscape area, the Reference Evapotranspiration
Adjustment Factor should be limited to 1.
2. The Project’s Water Supply Assessment is Inadequate Because It Fails to
Establish Sufficient Water Supply to Meet the Demand Associated with the
Project
The DEIR states that “[t]his document provides verification that adequate water supply
for this Project is available, as required by California Government Code Section 66473.7.
[emphasis added]” (DEIR, App. M, p. 61) However, adequate does not mean sufficient.
According to California Government Code Section 66473.7(a)(2), “sufficient water
supply” means the total water supplies available during normal, single-dry, and multiple-
dry years within a 20-year projection that will meet the projected demand associated with
the proposed subdivision, in addition to existing and planned future uses. In determining
“sufficient water supply,” all of the following factors shall be considered:
“(A) The availability of water supplies over a historical record of at least
20 years.
(B) The applicability of an urban water shortage contingency analysis
prepared pursuant to Section 10632 of the Water Code that includes
actions to be undertaken by the public water system in response to water
supply shortages.
(C) The reduction in water supply allocated to a specific water use sector
pursuant to a resolution or ordinance adopted, or a contract entered into,
by the public water system, as long as that resolution, ordinance, or
contract does not conflict with Section 354 of the Water Code.”
See Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007)
concluding that “without any “facts from which to evaluate the pros and cons of
supplying the [needed] amount of water” to the mine, the EIR was inadequate.” Vineyard
Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40 Cal.4th 412, 429,
as modified (Apr. 18, 2007)
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 20 of 25
Under CEQA Guidelines, an analysis of water supply in an environmental document
shall include:
“(1) Sufficient information regarding the project’s proposed water
demand and proposed water supplies to permit the lead agency to evaluate
the pros and cons of supplying the amount of water that the project will
need.
(2) An analysis of the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts of
supplying water throughout all phases of the project.
(3) An analysis of circumstances affecting the likelihood of the water’s
availability, as well as the degree of uncertainty involved. Relevant factors
may include but are not limited to, drought, salt- water intrusion,
regulatory or contractual curtailments, and other reasonably foreseeable
demands on the water supply.” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15155,
Subsection f)
In addition to relying on an improper Reference Evapotranspiration Adjustment
Factor; the EIR fails to evaluate and properly account for foreseeable
evapotranspiration on the Project’s water demand.
Specifically, the water demand was calculated without taking into account for annual
loss due to backwash, spilling, or potential refilling of the wave pool uses historical
weather data to account for monthly temperatures, humility, wind, cloud cover, and
solar radiation that affect evapotranspiration.
Therefore, the Project’s Water Supply Assessment is Inadequate
D. The Project’s Water Quality Management Plan is Deficient Because It
Fails to Properly Evaluate Impacts Relating to Percolation; and Instead
Defers Development of Environmental Mitigation Measures for the
Project Site’s Infiltration and Percolation Tests
CEQA mitigation measures proposed and adopted into an environmental impact
report are required to describe what actions that will be taken to reduce or avoid an
environmental impact. (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.4(a)(1)(B) [providing
“[f]ormulation of mitigation measures should not be deferred until some future
time.”].) While the same Guidelines section 15126.5(a)(1)(B) acknowledges an
exception to the rule against deferrals, but such exception is narrowly proscribed to
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 21 of 25
situations where “measures may specify performance standards which would mitigate
the significant effect of the project and which may be accomplished in more than one
specified way.” (Id.) Courts have also recognized a similar exception to the general
rule against deferral of mitigation measures where the performance criteria for each
mitigation measure is identified and described in the EIR. (Sacramento Old City Ass’n v.
City Council (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 1011.)
Impermissible deferral can occur when an EIR calls for mitigation measures to
be created based on future studies or describes mitigation measures in general terms
but the agency fails to commit itself to specific performance standards. (Preserve Wild
Santee v. City of Santee (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 260, 281 [city improperly deferred
mitigation to butterfly habitat by failing to provide standards or guidelines for its
management]; San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center v. County of Merced (2007) 149
Cal.App.4th 645, 671 [EIR failed to provide and commit to specific criteria or
standard of performance for mitigating impacts to biological habitats]; see also
Cleveland Nat'l Forest Found. v San Diego Ass'n of Gov'ts (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 413, 442
[generalized air quality measures in the EIR failed to set performance standards];
California Clean Energy Comm. v City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 173, 195
[agency could not rely on a future report on urban decay with no standards for
determining whether mitigation required]; POET, LLC v. State Air Resources Bd. (2013)
218 Cal.App.4th 681, 740 [agency could not rely on future rulemaking to establish
specifications to ensure emissions of nitrogen oxide would not increase because it did
not establish objective performance criteria for measuring whether that goal would
be achieved]; Gray v. County of Madera (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1099, 1119 [rejecting
mitigation measure requiring replacement water to be provided to neighboring
landowners because it identified a general goal for mitigation rather than specific
performance standard]; Endangered Habitats League, Inc. v. County of Orange (2005) 131
Cal.App.4th 777, 794 [requiring report without established standards is impermissible
delay].)
CEQA's demand for meaningful information “is not satisfied by simply stating
information will be provided in the future.” Santa Clarita Organization for Planning the
Environment v. County of Los Angeles (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 723, 131
Before approving a specific plan for an entire development, the decision makers must
be informed of the intended source or sources of water for the project, “what the
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 22 of 25
impact will be if supplied from a particular source or possible sources and if that
impact is adverse how it will be addressed.” Stanislaus Natural Heritage Project v. County of
Stanislaus (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 206.
According to the EIR, “[n]o percolation tests have been performed at the current time,
therefore, for the purposes of this report a design percolation rate of 1 in/hr was used
in the basin sizing calculations. Prior to the final design submittal, percolation tests will
be performed, and should the 1 inch/hour rate not be achieved, Maxwell drywells will
be proposed to de-water the basins within the required time period as specified by
Riverside County BMP requirements.” (DEIR, App. J.2, p. 2)
The FEIR states that to drain the basin, "the water will be drained into the large
retention basin on-site, which is unlined to allow percolation of the water into the
ground..” (FEIR, App, M.2,p. 3)
Deferring the percolation testing until sometime prior to the final design submittal not
only prevents the proper evaluation and mitigation of the Project’s impact relating to
Percolation, basin draining and de-watering but also, such deferment is impermissible
under CEQA.
Further, the Item is up for Planning Commission recommendation, yet there is no
information available regarding the percolation tests; besides the above -mentioned
deferred mitigation.
Therefore, the Water Quality Plan is inadequate and violates CEQA Guidelines. The
FEIR should be revised to address the impermissible deferment as well as to properly
evaluate the above Project’s impact relating to Percolation, basin draining and de-
watering.
IV. THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS
DEFICIENT
A. The FEIR Improperly Labels Mitigation Measures as Design
Modification, Which It Relies On to Eliminate Operation Noise Impacts
Relating to Cable Rollers During Artificial Waves Creation
The FEIR improperly labels mitigation measures for design modification or design
improvement” which the FEIR purports “effectively eliminates the cable roller system
operating noise source activities.” (FEIR, App. K3, p. 3)
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 23 of 25
Relying on the cable roller design features, the FEIR concludes in many instances that
the Project’s impacts are less than significant and that no mitigation is required.
According to the FEIR, “[t]he reduce the operation noise source levels from the wave
basin/wave machine, the Surf Ranch modified the cable roller system. This design
modification placed the existing above water cable roller system assembly measured on
April 13, 2020, to an underwater cable roller system assembly that was measured on
August 15, 2021. This design improvement effectively eliminates the cable roller
system operating noise source activities.” (FEIR, App. K3, p. 3)
As discussed above, mislabeling these mitigation measures further violates CEQA
because such measures would not be included in the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program CEQA requires lead agencies to adopt mitigation measures
that are fully enforceable and to adopt a monitoring and/or reporting program to
ensure that the measures are implemented to reduce the Project’s significant
environmental effects to the extent feasible. (PRC § 21081.6; CEQA Guidelines §
15091(d).) Therefore, using Project Design Modifications in lieu of mitigation
measures violate CEQA.
Therefore, the FEIR should properly adopt the Wave noise mitigation to ensure noise
levels relating to Waves production are eliminated throughout the entirety of the
Project.
B. The FEIR Adopts an Improper Environmental Baseline by Failing to
Evaluate Existing Biological Resources Conditions at the Project Site
According to PRC Section 15125(a) “An EIR must include a description of the
physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project. This environmental
setting will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by which a lead agency
determines whether an impact is significant. The description of the environmental
setting shall be no longer than necessary to provide an understanding of the
significant effects of the proposed project and its alternatives. The purposes of this
requirement is to give the public and decision makers the most accurate and
understandable picture practically possible of the project’s likely near-term and long-
term impacts”
“Generally, the lead agency should describe physical environmental conditions as they
exist at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 24 of 25
is published, at the time environmental analysis is commenced . . . .” CEQA
Guidelines § 15125(a).
In regard to the peninsular bighorn sheep, the FEIR inaccurately states that “the
project does not provide suitable habitat for PBS” (FEIR, p. 3-6) this is further
reiterated from the DEIR’s conclusion that “[t]his species is not present at the site
due to the absence of suitable habitat.” (DEIR, p. 231 )
However, this information is not accurate, the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife expressly stated that:
“The proposed Project occurs in Essential Habitat for Peninsular
bighorn sheep (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000) and has the
potential to impact Peninsular bighorn sheep a federally
endangered species (Fed. Register, Vol. 63, No. 52, 1998) and a
State endangered and California Fully Protected species (Calif. Dep.
Fish and Game 1992), and a Covered Species under CVMSHCP.
The DEIR incorrectly identifies that “this species [PBS] is not
present at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat” (page
231)” (FEIR, p. 2-78)
Further, the DEIR fails to identify state regulations that are applicable to the Project
including: Natural Community Conservation Protection Act (Fish & G. Code
Sections 2800 et seq.), Lake and Streambed Agreements (Fish & G. Code Section
1600 et seq.); Fully Protected Species (Fish & G. Code Section 4700), and CEQA.
By failing to adopt a proper baseline, omitting state regulations and mislabeling of the
mitigation measures, the FEIR fails to inform the public of critical information out
relating to potential environmental impacts.
In order to provide an accurate baseline, the FEIR should be revised and recirculated
with a correct the statement regarding species habitats on the Project Site.
V. CONCLUSION
Southwest Carpenters request that the City revise and recirculate the Project’s FEIR
to address the aforementioned concerns. If the City has any questions or concerns,
feel free to contact my Office.
Sincerely,
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort FEIR
March 22, 2022
Page 25 of 25
______________________
Mary Linares, Esq.
Attorneys for Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
Attached:
March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and
Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling (Exhibit A);
Air Quality and GHG Expert Paul Rosenfeld CV (Exhibit B);
Air Quality and GHG Expert Matt Hagemann CV (Exhibit C);
August 5, 2021 Letter from Mitchell M. Tsai re. Comments Regarding the Coral
Mountain Resort Draft Environmental Impact Report (Exhibit D);
EXHIBIT A
1
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
mhagemann@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
prosenfeld@swape.com
March 8, 2021
Mitchell M. Tsai
155 South El Molino, Suite 104
Pasadena, CA 91101
Subject: Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling
Dear Mr. Tsai,
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (“SWAPE”) is pleased to provide the following draft technical report
explaining the significance of worker trips required for construction of land use development projects with
respect to the estimation of greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions. The report will also discuss the potential for
local hire requirements to reduce the length of worker trips, and consequently, reduced or mitigate the
potential GHG impacts.
Worker Trips and Greenhouse Gas Calculations
The California Emissions Estimator Model (“CalEEMod”) is a “statewide land use emissions computer model
designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental
professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with both
construction and operations from a variety of land use projects.”1 CalEEMod quantifies construction-related
emissions associated with land use projects resulting from off-road construction equipment; on-road mobile
equipment associated with workers, vendors, and hauling; fugitive dust associated with grading, demolition,
truck loading, and on-road vehicles traveling along paved and unpaved roads; and architectural coating
activities; and paving.2
The number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to calculate emissions associated
with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the Project site during construction.3
1 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home.
2 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home.
3 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/01 user-39-s-guide2016-3-2 15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34.
2
Specifically, the number and length of vehicle trips is utilized to estimate the vehicle miles travelled (“VMT”)
associated with construction. Then, utilizing vehicle-class specific EMFAC 2014 emission factors, CalEEMod
calculates the vehicle exhaust, evaporative, and dust emissions resulting from construction-related VMT,
including personal vehicles for worker commuting.4
Specifically, in order to calculate VMT, CalEEMod multiplies the average daily trip rate by the average overall trip
length (see excerpt below):
“VMTd = Σ(Average Daily Trip Rate i * Average Overall Trip Length i) n
Where:
n = Number of land uses being modeled.”5
Furthermore, to calculate the on-road emissions associated with worker trips, CalEEMod utilizes the following
equation (see excerpt below):
“Emissionspollutant = VMT * EFrunning,pollutant
Where:
Emissionspollutant = emissions from vehicle running for each pollutant
VMT = vehicle miles traveled
EFrunning,pollutant = emission factor for running emissions.”6
Thus, there is a direct relationship between trip length and VMT, as well as a direct relationship between VMT
and vehicle running emissions. In other words, when the trip length is increased, the VMT and vehicle running
emissions increase as a result. Thus, vehicle running emissions can be reduced by decreasing the average overall
trip length, by way of a local hire requirement or otherwise.
Default Worker Trip Parameters and Potential Local Hire Requirements
As previously discussed, the number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to
calculate emissions associated with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the
Project site during construction.7 In order to understand how local hire requirements and associated worker trip
length reductions impact GHG emissions calculations, it is important to consider the CalEEMod default worker
trip parameters. CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site-specific information, such as
land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project
type. If more specific project information is known, the user can change the default values and input project-
specific values, but the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requires that such changes be justified by
substantial evidence.8 The default number of construction-related worker trips is calculated by multiplying the
4 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 14-15.
5 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 23.
6 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 15.
7 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/01 user-39-s-guide2016-3-2 15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34.
8 CalEEMod User Guide, available at: http://www.caleemod.com/, p. 1, 9.
5
Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we
retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional
services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar
circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of
service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and
protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which
were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain
informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of
information obtained or provided by third parties.
Sincerely,
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
Location Type Location Name Rural H-W
(miles)
Urban H-W
(miles)
Air Basin Great Basin 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Lake County 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Lake Tahoe 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Mountain 16.8 10.8
Air Basin North Central 17.1 12.3
Air Basin North Coast 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Northeast 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Sacramento 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Salton Sea 14.6 11
Air Basin San Diego 16.8 10.8
Air Basin San Francisco
10.8 10.8
Air Basin San Joaquin 16.8 10.8
Air Basin South Central 16.8 10.8
Air Basin South Coast 19.8 14.7
Air District Amador County 16.8 10.8
Air District Antelope Valley 16.8 10.8
Air District Bay Area AQMD 10.8 10.8
Air District Butte County 12.54 12.54
Air District Calaveras
16.8 10.8
Air District Colusa County 16.8 10.8
Air District El Dorado
16.8 10.8
Air District Feather River 16.8 10.8
Air District Glenn County 16.8 10.8
Air District Great Basin 16.8 10.8
Air District Imperial County 10.2 7.3
Air District Kern County 16.8 10.8
Air District Lake County 16.8 10.8
Air District Lassen County 16.8 10.8
Air District Mariposa
16.8 10.8
Air District Mendocino
16.8 10.8
Air District Modoc County 16.8 10.8
Air District Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Air District Monterey Bay
16.8 10.8
Air District North Coast
16.8 10.8
Air District Northern Sierra 16.8 10.8
Air District Northern
16.8 10.8
Air District Placer County 16.8 10.8
Air District Sacramento 15 10
Attachment A
Air District San Diego
16.8 10.8
Air District San Joaquin
16.8 10.8
Air District San Luis Obispo
13 13
Air District Santa Barbara
8.3 8.3
Air District Shasta County 16.8 10.8
Air District Siskiyou County
16.8 10.8
Air District South Coast 19.8 14.7
Air District Tehama County 16.8 10.8
Air District Tuolumne 16.8 10.8
Air District Ventura County 16.8 10.8
Air District Yolo/Solano 15 10
County Alameda 10.8 10.8
County Alpine 16.8 10.8
County Amador 16.8 10.8
County Butte 12.54 12.54
County Calaveras 16.8 10.8
County Colusa 16.8 10.8
County Contra Costa 10.8 10.8
County Del Norte 16.8 10.8
County El Dorado-Lake 16.8 10.8
County El Dorado-16.8 10.8
County Fresno 16.8 10.8
County Glenn 16.8 10.8
County Humboldt 16.8 10.8
County Imperial 10.2 7.3
County Inyo 16.8 10.8
County Kern-Mojave 16.8 10.8
County Kern-San 16.8 10.8
County Kings 16.8 10.8
County Lake 16.8 10.8
County Lassen 16.8 10.8
County Los Angeles-16.8 10.8
County Los Angeles-19.8 14.7
County Madera 16.8 10.8
County Marin 10.8 10.8
County Mariposa 16.8 10.8
County Mendocino-16.8 10.8
County Mendocino-16.8 10.8
County Mendocino-16.8 10.8
County Mendocino-16.8 10.8
County Merced 16.8 10.8
County Modoc 16.8 10.8
County Mono 16.8 10.8
County Monterey 16.8 10.8
County Napa 10.8 10.8
County Nevada 16.8 10.8
County Orange 19.8 14.7
County Placer-Lake 16.8 10.8
County Placer-Mountain 16.8 10.8
County Placer-16.8 10.8
County Plumas 16.8 10.8
County Riverside-16.8 10.8
County Riverside-
19.8 14.7
County Riverside-Salton 14.6 11
County Riverside-South 19.8 14.7
County Sacramento 15 10
County San Benito 16.8 10.8
County San Bernardino-
16.8 10.8
County San Bernardino-
19.8 14.7
County San Diego 16.8 10.8
County San Francisco 10.8 10.8
County San Joaquin 16.8 10.8
County San Luis Obispo 13 13
County San Mateo 10.8 10.8
County Santa Barbara-
8.3 8.3
County Santa Barbara-
8.3 8.3
County Santa Clara 10.8 10.8
County Santa Cruz 16.8 10.8
County Shasta 16.8 10.8
County Sierra 16.8 10.8
County Siskiyou 16.8 10.8
County Solano-15 10
County Solano-San 16.8 10.8
County Sonoma-North 16.8 10.8
County Sonoma-San 10.8 10.8
County Stanislaus 16.8 10.8
County Sutter 16.8 10.8
County Tehama 16.8 10.8
County Trinity 16.8 10.8
County Tulare 16.8 10.8
County Tuolumne 16.8 10.8
County Ventura 16.8 10.8
County Yolo 15 10
County Yuba 16.8 10.8
Statewide Statewide 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Rural (miles)Urban (miles)
Great Basin Valleys 16.8 10.8
Lake County 16.8 10.8
Lake Tahoe 16.8 10.8
Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Mountain Counties 16.8 10.8
North Central Coast 17.1 12.3
North Coast 16.8 10.8
Northeast Plateau 16.8 10.8
Sacramento Valley 16.8 10.8
Salton Sea 14.6 11
San Diego 16.8 10.8
San Francisco Bay Area 10.8 10.8
San Joaquin Valley 16.8 10.8
South Central Coast 16.8 10.8
South Coast 19.8 14.7
Average 16.47 11.17
Mininum 10.80 10.80
Maximum 19.80 14.70
Range 9.00 3.90
Worker Trip Length by Air Basin
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 2 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 3 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 0.1713 1 8242 1.1662 2.4000e-
003
0.4169 0.0817 0.4986 0.1795 0.0754 0.2549 0 0000 213.1969 213.1969 0.0601 0.0000 214.6993
2022 0.6904 4.1142 6.1625 0 0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0 0000 1,721.682
6
1,721.682
6
0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
7
2023 0.6148 3 3649 5.6747 0 0178 1.1963 0.0996 1.2959 0.3203 0.0935 0.4138 0 0000 1,627.529
5
1,627.529
5
0.1185 0.0000 1,630.492
5
2024 4.1619 0.1335 0.2810 5.9000e-
004
0.0325 6.4700e-
003
0.0390 8.6300e-
003
6.0400e-
003
0.0147 0 0000 52.9078 52.9078 8.0200e-
003
0.0000 53.1082
Maximum 4.1619 4.1142 6.1625 0.0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0.0000 1,721.682
6
1,721.682
6
0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
7
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 4 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 0.1713 1 8242 1.1662 2.4000e-
003
0.4169 0.0817 0.4986 0.1795 0.0754 0.2549 0 0000 213.1967 213.1967 0.0601 0.0000 214.6991
2022 0.6904 4.1142 6.1625 0 0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0 0000 1,721.682
3
1,721.682
3
0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
3
2023 0.6148 3 3648 5.6747 0 0178 1.1963 0.0996 1.2959 0.3203 0.0935 0.4138 0 0000 1,627.529
1
1,627.529
1
0.1185 0.0000 1,630.492
1
2024 4.1619 0.1335 0.2810 5.9000e-
004
0.0325 6.4700e-
003
0.0390 8.6300e-
003
6.0400e-
003
0.0147 0 0000 52.9077 52.9077 8.0200e-
003
0.0000 53.1082
Maximum 4.1619 4.1142 6.1625 0.0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0.0000 1,721.682
3
1,721.682
3
0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
3
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 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
1 9-1-2021 11-30-2021 1.4103 1.4103
2 12-1-2021 2-28-2022 1.3613 1.3613
3 3-1-2022 5-31-2022 1.1985 1.1985
4 6-1-2022 8-31-2022 1.1921 1.1921
5 9-1-2022 11-30-2022 1.1918 1.1918
6 12-1-2022 2-28-2023 1.0774 1.0774
7 3-1-2023 5-31-2023 1.0320 1.0320
8 6-1-2023 8-31-2023 1.0260 1.0260
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 5 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Energy 0.1398 1 2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0 0000 3,896.073
2
3,896.073
2
0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283
3
Mobile 1.5857 7 9962 19.1834 0 0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0 0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 0.0000 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 29.1632 556.6420 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Total 6.8692 9.5223 30.3407 0.0914 7.7979 0.2260 8.0240 2.0895 0.2219 2.3114 236.9712 12,294.18
07
12,531.15
19
15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47
51
Unmitigated Operational
9 9-1-2023 11-30-2023 1.0265 1.0265
10 12-1-2023 2-29-2024 2.8857 2.8857
11 3-1-2024 5-31-2024 1.6207 1.6207
Highest 2.8857 2.8857
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 6 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Energy 0.1398 1 2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0 0000 3,896.073
2
3,896.073
2
0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283
3
Mobile 1.5857 7 9962 19.1834 0 0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0 0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 0.0000 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 29.1632 556.6420 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Total 6.8692 9.5223 30.3407 0.0914 7.7979 0.2260 8.0240 2.0895 0.2219 2.3114 236.9712 12,294.18
07
12,531.15
19
15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47
51
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
0.00 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 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 7 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
OffRoad Equipment
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 8 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 9 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5 8000e-
004
0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601
Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004
0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e-
003
0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 10 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 1.9300e-
003
0.0634 0.0148 1 8000e-
004
3.9400e-
003
1.9000e-
004
4.1300e-
003
1.0800e-
003
1.8000e-
004
1.2600e-
003
0.0000 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e-
003
0.0000 17.4869
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 9.7000e-
004
7.5000e-
004
8.5100e-
003
2 0000e-
005
2.4700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.4900e-
003
6.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
6.7000e-
004
0.0000 2.2251 2.2251 7.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.2267
Total 2.9000e-
003
0.0641 0.0233 2.0000e-
004
6.4100e-
003
2.1000e-
004
6.6200e-
003
1.7300e-
003
2.0000e-
004
1.9300e-
003
0.0000 19.6816 19.6816 1.2800e-
003
0.0000 19.7136
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 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5 8000e-
004
0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600
Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004
0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e-
003
0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 11 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 1.9300e-
003
0.0634 0.0148 1 8000e-
004
3.9400e-
003
1.9000e-
004
4.1300e-
003
1.0800e-
003
1.8000e-
004
1.2600e-
003
0.0000 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e-
003
0.0000 17.4869
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 9.7000e-
004
7.5000e-
004
8.5100e-
003
2 0000e-
005
2.4700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.4900e-
003
6.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
6.7000e-
004
0.0000 2.2251 2.2251 7.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.2267
Total 2.9000e-
003
0.0641 0.0233 2.0000e-
004
6.4100e-
003
2.1000e-
004
6.6200e-
003
1.7300e-
003
2.0000e-
004
1.9300e-
003
0.0000 19.6816 19.6816 1.2800e-
003
0.0000 19.7136
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.1807 0.0000 0.1807 0.0993 0.0000 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3 8000e-
004
0.0204 0.0204 0.0188 0.0188 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061
Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004
0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 12 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 7.7000e-
004
6.0000e-
004
6.8100e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.9700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9900e-
003
5.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
5.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.7814
Total 7.7000e-
004
6.0000e-
004
6.8100e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9900e-
003
5.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
5.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.7814
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 0.1807 0.0000 0.1807 0.0993 0.0000 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3 8000e-
004
0.0204 0.0204 0.0188 0.0188 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060
Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004
0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 13 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 7.7000e-
004
6.0000e-
004
6.8100e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.9700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9900e-
003
5.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
5.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.7814
Total 7.7000e-
004
6.0000e-
004
6.8100e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9700e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.9900e-
003
5.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
5.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.7814
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 0.0693 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 103.5405 103 5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776
Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5405 103.5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 14 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 1.6400e-
003
1.2700e-
003
0.0144 4 0000e-
005
4.1600e-
003
3.0000e-
005
4.2000e-
003
1.1100e-
003
3.0000e-
005
1.1400e-
003
0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004
0.0000 3.7607
Total 1.6400e-
003
1.2700e-
003
0.0144 4.0000e-
005
4.1600e-
003
3.0000e-
005
4.2000e-
003
1.1100e-
003
3.0000e-
005
1.1400e-
003
0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004
0.0000 3.7607
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 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 0.0693 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 103.5403 103 5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775
Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5403 103.5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 15 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 1.6400e-
003
1.2700e-
003
0.0144 4 0000e-
005
4.1600e-
003
3.0000e-
005
4.2000e-
003
1.1100e-
003
3.0000e-
005
1.1400e-
003
0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004
0.0000 3.7607
Total 1.6400e-
003
1.2700e-
003
0.0144 4.0000e-
005
4.1600e-
003
3.0000e-
005
4.2000e-
003
1.1100e-
003
3.0000e-
005
1.1400e-
003
0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004
0.0000 3.7607
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0807 0.0000 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2 2000e-
004
5.7200e-
003
5.7200e-
003
5.2600e-
003
5.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004
0.0807 5.7200e-
003
0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e-
003
0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 16 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 2.8000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1 0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.1000e-
004
0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6684
Total 2.8000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.1000e-
004
0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6684
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 0.0807 0.0000 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2 2000e-
004
5.7200e-
003
5.7200e-
003
5.2600e-
003
5.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004
0.0807 5.7200e-
003
0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e-
003
0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 17 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 2.8000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1 0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.1000e-
004
0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6684
Total 2.8000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.1000e-
004
0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6684
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881
Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 18 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.0527 1.6961 0.4580 4 5500e-
003
0.1140 3.1800e-
003
0.1171 0.0329 3.0400e-
003
0.0359 0.0000 441.9835 441 9835 0.0264 0.0000 442.6435
Worker 0.4088 0.3066 3.5305 0.0107 1.1103 8.8700e-
003
1.1192 0.2949 8.1700e-
003
0.3031 0.0000 966.8117 966 8117 0.0266 0.0000 967.4773
Total 0.4616 2.0027 3.9885 0.0152 1.2243 0.0121 1.2363 0.3278 0.0112 0.3390 0.0000 1,408.795
2
1,408.795
2
0.0530 0.0000 1,410.120
8
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 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877
Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 19 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.0527 1.6961 0.4580 4 5500e-
003
0.1140 3.1800e-
003
0.1171 0.0329 3.0400e-
003
0.0359 0.0000 441.9835 441 9835 0.0264 0.0000 442.6435
Worker 0.4088 0.3066 3.5305 0.0107 1.1103 8.8700e-
003
1.1192 0.2949 8.1700e-
003
0.3031 0.0000 966.8117 966 8117 0.0266 0.0000 967.4773
Total 0.4616 2.0027 3.9885 0.0152 1.2243 0.0121 1.2363 0.3278 0.0112 0.3390 0.0000 1,408.795
2
1,408.795
2
0.0530 0.0000 1,410.120
8
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3 3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286 2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814
Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286.2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 20 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.0382 1.2511 0.4011 4 3000e-
003
0.1113 1.4600e-
003
0.1127 0.0321 1.4000e-
003
0.0335 0.0000 417.9930 417 9930 0.0228 0.0000 418.5624
Worker 0.3753 0.2708 3.1696 0.0101 1.0840 8.4100e-
003
1.0924 0.2879 7.7400e-
003
0.2957 0.0000 909.3439 909 3439 0.0234 0.0000 909.9291
Total 0.4135 1.5218 3.5707 0.0144 1.1953 9.8700e-
003
1.2051 0.3200 9.1400e-
003
0.3292 0.0000 1,327.336
9
1,327.336
9
0.0462 0.0000 1,328.491
6
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 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3 3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286 2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811
Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286.2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 21 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.0382 1.2511 0.4011 4 3000e-
003
0.1113 1.4600e-
003
0.1127 0.0321 1.4000e-
003
0.0335 0.0000 417.9930 417 9930 0.0228 0.0000 418.5624
Worker 0.3753 0.2708 3.1696 0.0101 1.0840 8.4100e-
003
1.0924 0.2879 7.7400e-
003
0.2957 0.0000 909.3439 909 3439 0.0234 0.0000 909.9291
Total 0.4135 1.5218 3.5707 0.0144 1.1953 9.8700e-
003
1.2051 0.3200 9.1400e-
003
0.3292 0.0000 1,327.336
9
1,327.336
9
0.0462 0.0000 1,328.491
6
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1 5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 22 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 3.7000e-
004
2.7000e-
004
3.1200e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0800e-
003
2.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.8968
Total 3.7000e-
004
2.7000e-
004
3.1200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0800e-
003
2.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.8968
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 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1 5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 23 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 3.7000e-
004
2.7000e-
004
3.1200e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0800e-
003
2.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.8968
Total 3.7000e-
004
2.7000e-
004
3.1200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0800e-
003
2.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.8968
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2 5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 24 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 5.9000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
4.9200e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.8100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.8200e-
003
4.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.4706
Total 5.9000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
4.9200e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.8100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.8200e-
003
4.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.4706
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 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2 5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 25 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 5.9000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
4.9200e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.8100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.8200e-
003
4.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.4706
Total 5.9000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
4.9200e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.8100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.8200e-
003
4.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.4706
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1600e-
003
0.0213 0.0317 5 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 26 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.0101 6.9900e-
003
0.0835 2 8000e-
004
0.0307 2.3000e-
004
0.0309 8.1500e-
003
2.2000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004
0.0000 24.9558
Total 0.0101 6.9900e-
003
0.0835 2.8000e-
004
0.0307 2.3000e-
004
0.0309 8.1500e-
003
2.2000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004
0.0000 24.9558
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 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1600e-
003
0.0213 0.0317 5 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 27 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.0101 6.9900e-
003
0.0835 2 8000e-
004
0.0307 2.3000e-
004
0.0309 8.1500e-
003
2.2000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004
0.0000 24.9558
Total 0.0101 6.9900e-
003
0.0835 2.8000e-
004
0.0307 2.3000e-
004
0.0309 8.1500e-
003
2.2000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004
0.0000 24.9558
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 28 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Unmitigated 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 29 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 30 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Electricity
Mitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2,512.646
5
2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Electricity
Unmitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2,512.646
5
2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
7
1,383.426
7
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
7
1,383.426
7
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 31 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
408494 2.2000e-
003
0.0188 8.0100e-
003
1.2000e-
004
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
0.0000 21.7988 21.7988 4.2000e-
004
4.0000e-
004
21.9284
Apartments Mid
Rise
1.30613e
+007
0.0704 0.6018 0.2561 3.8400e-
003
0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 696.9989 696.9989 0.0134 0.0128 701.1408
General Office
Building
468450 2.5300e-
003
0.0230 0.0193 1.4000e-
004
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
0.0000 24.9983 24.9983 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1468
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
8.30736e
+006
0.0448 0.4072 0.3421 2.4400e-
003
0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 443.3124 443.3124 8.5000e-
003
8.1300e-
003
445.9468
Hotel 1.74095e
+006
9.3900e-
003
0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
0.0000 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e-
003
1.7000e-
003
93.4557
Quality
Restaurant
1.84608e
+006
9.9500e-
003
0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e-
004
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e-
003
1.8100e-
003
99.0993
Regional
Shopping Center
91840 5.0000e-
004
4.5000e-
003
3.7800e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 4.9009 4.9009 9.0000e-
005
9.0000e-
005
4.9301
Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
8
1,383.426
8
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 32 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
408494 2.2000e-
003
0.0188 8.0100e-
003
1.2000e-
004
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
0.0000 21.7988 21.7988 4.2000e-
004
4.0000e-
004
21.9284
Apartments Mid
Rise
1.30613e
+007
0.0704 0.6018 0.2561 3.8400e-
003
0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 696.9989 696.9989 0.0134 0.0128 701.1408
General Office
Building
468450 2.5300e-
003
0.0230 0.0193 1.4000e-
004
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
0.0000 24.9983 24.9983 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1468
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
8.30736e
+006
0.0448 0.4072 0.3421 2.4400e-
003
0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 443.3124 443.3124 8.5000e-
003
8.1300e-
003
445.9468
Hotel 1.74095e
+006
9.3900e-
003
0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
0.0000 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e-
003
1.7000e-
003
93.4557
Quality
Restaurant
1.84608e
+006
9.9500e-
003
0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e-
004
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e-
003
1.8100e-
003
99.0993
Regional
Shopping Center
91840 5.0000e-
004
4.5000e-
003
3.7800e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 4.9009 4.9009 9.0000e-
005
9.0000e-
005
4.9301
Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
8
1,383.426
8
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 33 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
106010 33.7770 1.3900e-
003
2.9000e-
004
33.8978
Apartments Mid
Rise
3.94697e
+006
1,257.587
9
0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086
9
General Office
Building
584550 186.2502 7.6900e-
003
1.5900e-
003
186.9165
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
1.58904e
+006
506.3022 0.0209 4.3200e-
003
508.1135
Hotel 550308 175.3399 7.2400e-
003
1.5000e-
003
175.9672
Quality
Restaurant
353120 112.5116 4.6500e-
003
9.6000e-
004
112.9141
Regional
Shopping Center
756000 240.8778 9.9400e-
003
2.0600e-
003
241.7395
Total 2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 34 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
106010 33.7770 1.3900e-
003
2.9000e-
004
33.8978
Apartments Mid
Rise
3.94697e
+006
1,257.587
9
0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086
9
General Office
Building
584550 186.2502 7.6900e-
003
1.5900e-
003
186.9165
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
1.58904e
+006
506.3022 0.0209 4.3200e-
003
508.1135
Hotel 550308 175.3399 7.2400e-
003
1.5000e-
003
175.9672
Quality
Restaurant
353120 112.5116 4.6500e-
003
9.6000e-
004
112.9141
Regional
Shopping Center
756000 240.8778 9.9400e-
003
2.0600e-
003
241.7395
Total 2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 35 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Unmitigated 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
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
0.4137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
4.3998 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0206 0.1763 0.0750 1.1200e-
003
0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0 0000 204.1166 204.1166 3.9100e-
003
3.7400e-
003
205.3295
Landscaping 0.3096 0.1187 10.3054 5.4000e-
004
0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0 0000 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540
Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 36 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
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
0.4137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
4.3998 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0206 0.1763 0.0750 1.1200e-
003
0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0 0000 204.1166 204.1166 3.9100e-
003
3.7400e-
003
205.3295
Landscaping 0.3096 0.1187 10.3054 5.4000e-
004
0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0 0000 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540
Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 37 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 585.8052 3 0183 0.0755 683.7567
Unmitigated 585.8052 3 0183 0.0755 683.7567
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 38 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
1.62885 /
1.02688
10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e-
003
12.6471
Apartments Mid
Rise
63.5252 /
40.0485
425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363
General Office
Building
7.99802 /
4.90201
53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e-
003
61.6019
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
10.9272 /
0.697482
51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e-
003
62.8482
Hotel 1.26834 /
0.140927
6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e-
003
7.5079
Quality
Restaurant
2.42827 /
0.154996
11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e-
003
13.9663
Regional
Shopping Center
4.14806 /
2.54236
27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e-
003
31.9490
Total 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 39 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.62885 /
1.02688
10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e-
003
12.6471
Apartments Mid
Rise
63.5252 /
40.0485
425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363
General Office
Building
7.99802 /
4.90201
53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e-
003
61.6019
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
10.9272 /
0.697482
51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e-
003
62.8482
Hotel 1.26834 /
0.140927
6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e-
003
7.5079
Quality
Restaurant
2.42827 /
0.154996
11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e-
003
13.9663
Regional
Shopping Center
4.14806 /
2.54236
27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e-
003
31.9490
Total 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Mitigated
8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 40 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Unmitigated 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 41 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
11.5 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834
Apartments Mid
Rise
448.5 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 225.5513
General Office
Building
41.85 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 21.0464
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
428.4 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430
Hotel 27.38 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 13.7694
Quality
Restaurant
7.3 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712
Regional
Shopping Center
58.8 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706
Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 42 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
11.5 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834
Apartments Mid
Rise
448.5 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 225.5513
General Office
Building
41.85 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 21.0464
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
428.4 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430
Hotel 27.38 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 13.7694
Quality
Restaurant
7.3 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712
Regional
Shopping Center
58.8 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706
Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Mitigated
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
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 43 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
11.0 Vegetation
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 44 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0
Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72
Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789
Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 1 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 2 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 3 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2769 46.4588 31.6840 0 0643 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0 0000 6,234.797
4
6,234.797
4
1.9495 0.0000 6,283.535
2
2022 5.3304 38.8967 49.5629 0.1517 9.8688 1.6366 10.7727 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0 0000 15,251.56
74
15,251.56
74
1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88
2023 4.8957 26.3317 46.7567 0.1472 9.8688 0.7794 10.6482 2.6381 0.7322 3.3702 0 0000 14,807.52
69
14,807.52
69
1.0250 0.0000 14,833.15
21
2024 237.1630 9 5575 15.1043 0 0244 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0 0000 2,361.398
9
2,361.398
9
0.7177 0.0000 2,379.342
1
Maximum 237.1630 46.4588 49.5629 0.1517 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 15,251.56
74
15,251.56
74
1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 4 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2769 46.4588 31.6840 0 0643 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0 0000 6,234.797
4
6,234.797
4
1.9495 0.0000 6,283.535
2
2022 5.3304 38.8967 49.5629 0.1517 9.8688 1.6366 10.7727 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0 0000 15,251.56
74
15,251.56
74
1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88
2023 4.8957 26.3317 46.7567 0.1472 9.8688 0.7794 10.6482 2.6381 0.7322 3.3702 0 0000 14,807.52
69
14,807.52
69
1.0250 0.0000 14,833.15
20
2024 237.1630 9 5575 15.1043 0 0244 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0 0000 2,361.398
9
2,361.398
9
0.7177 0.0000 2,379.342
1
Maximum 237.1630 46.4588 49.5629 0.1517 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 15,251.56
74
15,251.56
74
1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88
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 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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 5 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Total 41.1168 67.2262 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18
16
76,811.18
16
2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87
86
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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Total 41.1168 67.2262 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18
16
76,811.18
16
2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87
86
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 6 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
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
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 0.00
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 7 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 8 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 9 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241
3
1,292.241
3
0.0877 1,294.433
7
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 0.0643 0.0442 0.6042 1.7100e-
003
0.1677 1.3500e-
003
0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003
0.0457 170.8155 170 8155 5.0300e-
003
170.9413
Total 0.1916 4.1394 1.5644 0.0136 0.4346 0.0139 0.4485 0.1176 0.0133 0.1309 1,463.056
8
1,463.056
8
0.0927 1,465.375
0
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 10 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241
3
1,292.241
3
0.0877 1,294.433
7
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 0.0643 0.0442 0.6042 1.7100e-
003
0.1677 1.3500e-
003
0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003
0.0457 170.8155 170 8155 5.0300e-
003
170.9413
Total 0.1916 4.1394 1.5644 0.0136 0.4346 0.0139 0.4485 0.1176 0.0133 0.1309 1,463.056
8
1,463.056
8
0.0927 1,465.375
0
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 11 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2 0600e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 204.9786 204 9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
Total 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2.0600e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
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 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 12 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2 0600e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 204.9786 204 9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
Total 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2.0600e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 13 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2 2900e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
Total 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2.2900e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 14 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2 2900e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
Total 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2.2900e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 15 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2 2100e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
Total 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2.2100e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 16 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2 2100e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
Total 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2.2100e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 17 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4079 13 2032 3.4341 0.0364 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548
2
3,896.548
2
0.2236 3,902.138
4
Worker 3.2162 2.1318 29.7654 0.0883 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,800.685
7
8,800.685
7
0.2429 8,806.758
2
Total 3.6242 15.3350 33.1995 0.1247 9.8688 0.0949 9.9637 2.6381 0.0883 2.7263 12,697.23
39
12,697.23
39
0.4665 12,708.89
66
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 18 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4079 13 2032 3.4341 0.0364 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548
2
3,896.548
2
0.2236 3,902.138
4
Worker 3.2162 2.1318 29.7654 0.0883 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,800.685
7
8,800.685
7
0.2429 8,806.758
2
Total 3.6242 15.3350 33.1995 0.1247 9.8688 0.0949 9.9637 2.6381 0.0883 2.7263 12,697.23
39
12,697.23
39
0.4665 12,708.89
66
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 19 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3027 10 0181 3.1014 0.0352 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 3,773.876
2
3,773.876
2
0.1982 3,778.830
0
Worker 3.0203 1.9287 27.4113 0.0851 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 8,478.440
8
8,478.440
8
0.2190 8,483.916
0
Total 3.3229 11.9468 30.5127 0.1203 9.8688 0.0797 9.9485 2.6381 0.0738 2.7118 12,252.31
70
12,252.31
70
0.4172 12,262.74
60
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 20 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3027 10 0181 3.1014 0.0352 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 3,773.876
2
3,773.876
2
0.1982 3,778.830
0
Worker 3.0203 1.9287 27.4113 0.0851 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 8,478.440
8
8,478.440
8
0.2190 8,483.916
0
Total 3.3229 11.9468 30.5127 0.1203 9.8688 0.0797 9.9485 2.6381 0.0738 2.7118 12,252.31
70
12,252.31
70
0.4172 12,262.74
60
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 21 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1 5900e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
Total 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1.5900e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 22 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1 5900e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
Total 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1.5900e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 23 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1 5400e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 153.8517 153 8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
Total 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1.5400e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 24 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1 5400e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 153.8517 153 8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
Total 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1.5400e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 25 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085
2
1,641.085
2
0.0401 1,642.088
6
Total 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085
2
1,641.085
2
0.0401 1,642.088
6
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 26 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085
2
1,641.085
2
0.0401 1,642.088
6
Total 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085
2
1,641.085
2
0.0401 1,642.088
6
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 27 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Unmitigated 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 28 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 29 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 30 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
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
Apartments Low
Rise
1119.16 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35784.3 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1283.42 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22759.9 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4769.72 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5057.75 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
251.616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 31 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.11916 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35.7843 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1.28342 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22.7599 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4.76972 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5.05775 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
0.251616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 32 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 33 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste 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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 34 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
11.0 Vegetation
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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 35 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0
Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72
Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789
Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 1 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 2 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 3 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2865 46.4651 31.6150 0 0642 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0 0000 6,221.493
7
6,221.493
7
1.9491 0.0000 6,270.221
4
2022 5.7218 38.9024 47.3319 0.1455 9.8688 1.6366 10.7736 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0 0000 14,630.30
99
14,630.30
99
1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63
2023 5.2705 26.4914 44.5936 0.1413 9.8688 0.7800 10.6488 2.6381 0.7328 3.3708 0 0000 14,210.34
24
14,210.34
24
1.0230 0.0000 14,235.91
60
2024 237.2328 9 5610 15.0611 0 0243 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0 0000 2,352.417
8
2,352.417
8
0.7175 0.0000 2,370.355
0
Maximum 237.2328 46.4651 47.3319 0.1455 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 14,630.30
99
14,630.30
99
1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 4 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2865 46.4651 31.6150 0 0642 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0 0000 6,221.493
7
6,221.493
7
1.9491 0.0000 6,270.221
4
2022 5.7218 38.9024 47.3319 0.1455 9.8688 1.6366 10.7736 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0 0000 14,630.30
99
14,630.30
99
1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63
2023 5.2705 26.4914 44.5936 0.1413 9.8688 0.7800 10.6488 2.6381 0.7328 3.3708 0 0000 14,210.34
24
14,210.34
24
1.0230 0.0000 14,235.91
60
2024 237.2328 9 5610 15.0611 0 0243 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0 0000 2,352.417
8
2,352.417
8
0.7175 0.0000 2,370.355
0
Maximum 237.2328 46.4651 47.3319 0.1455 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 14,630.30
99
14,630.30
99
1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63
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 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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 5 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.5233 45.9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Total 40.7912 67.7872 202.7424 0.6043 45.9592 2.4640 48.4231 12.2950 2.4399 14.7349 0.0000 74,422.37
87
74,422.37
87
2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44
17
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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.5233 45.9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Total 40.7912 67.7872 202.7424 0.6043 45.9592 2.4640 48.4231 12.2950 2.4399 14.7349 0.0000 74,422.37
87
74,422.37
87
2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44
17
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 6 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
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
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 0.00
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 7 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 8 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 9 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855
5
1,269.855
5
0.0908 1,272.125
2
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 0.0715 0.0489 0.5524 1.6100e-
003
0.1677 1.3500e-
003
0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003
0.0457 160.8377 160 8377 4.7300e-
003
160.9560
Total 0.2019 4.1943 1.5706 0.0133 0.4346 0.0141 0.4487 0.1176 0.0135 0.1311 1,430.693
2
1,430.693
2
0.0955 1,433.081
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
Fugitive Dust 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 10 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855
5
1,269.855
5
0.0908 1,272.125
2
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 0.0715 0.0489 0.5524 1.6100e-
003
0.1677 1.3500e-
003
0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003
0.0457 160.8377 160 8377 4.7300e-
003
160.9560
Total 0.2019 4.1943 1.5706 0.0133 0.4346 0.0141 0.4487 0.1176 0.0135 0.1311 1,430.693
2
1,430.693
2
0.0955 1,433.081
2
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 11 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1 9400e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 193.0052 193 0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
Total 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1.9400e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
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 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 12 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1 9400e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 193.0052 193 0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
Total 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1.9400e-
003
0.2012 1.6300e-
003
0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003
0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 13 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
Total 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 14 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
Total 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003
0.2236 1.8100e-
003
0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003
0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 15 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2 0800e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 206.9139 206 9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
Total 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2.0800e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 16 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2 0800e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 206.9139 206 9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
Total 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2.0800e-
003
0.2236 1.7500e-
003
0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003
0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 17 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4284 13.1673 3.8005 0.0354 0.9155 0.0256 0.9412 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075
0
3,789.075
0
0.2381 3,795.028
3
Worker 3.5872 2.3593 27.1680 0.0832 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,286.901
3
8,286.901
3
0.2282 8,292.605
8
Total 4.0156 15.5266 30.9685 0.1186 9.8688 0.0957 9.9645 2.6381 0.0891 2.7271 12,075.97
63
12,075.97
63
0.4663 12,087.63
41
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 18 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4284 13.1673 3.8005 0.0354 0.9155 0.0256 0.9412 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075
0
3,789.075
0
0.2381 3,795.028
3
Worker 3.5872 2.3593 27.1680 0.0832 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,286.901
3
8,286.901
3
0.2282 8,292.605
8
Total 4.0156 15.5266 30.9685 0.1186 9.8688 0.0957 9.9645 2.6381 0.0891 2.7271 12,075.97
63
12,075.97
63
0.4663 12,087.63
41
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 19 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3183 9.9726 3.3771 0.0343 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 3,671.400
7
3,671.400
7
0.2096 3,676.641
7
Worker 3.3795 2.1338 24.9725 0.0801 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 7,983.731
8
7,983.731
8
0.2055 7,988.868
3
Total 3.6978 12.1065 28.3496 0.1144 9.8688 0.0803 9.9491 2.6381 0.0743 2.7124 11,655.13
25
11,655.13
25
0.4151 11,665.50
99
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 20 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3183 9.9726 3.3771 0.0343 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 3,671.400
7
3,671.400
7
0.2096 3,676.641
7
Worker 3.3795 2.1338 24.9725 0.0801 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 7,983.731
8
7,983.731
8
0.2055 7,988.868
3
Total 3.6978 12.1065 28.3496 0.1144 9.8688 0.0803 9.9491 2.6381 0.0743 2.7124 11,655.13
25
11,655.13
25
0.4151 11,665.50
99
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 21 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1 5000e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 149.5081 149 5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
Total 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1.5000e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 22 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1 5000e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 149.5081 149 5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
Total 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1.5000e-
003
0.1677 1.2800e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003
0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 23 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 144.8706 144 8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
Total 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 24 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 144.8706 144 8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
Total 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003
0.1677 1.2600e-
003
0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003
0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 25 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.6406 0.3886 4.6439 0.0155 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,545.286
0
1,545.286
0
0.0376 1,546.226
2
Total 0.6406 0.3886 4.6439 0.0155 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,545.286
0
1,545.286
0
0.0376 1,546.226
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
Archit. Coating 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 26 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.6406 0.3886 4.6439 0.0155 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,545.286
0
1,545.286
0
0.0376 1,546.226
2
Total 0.6406 0.3886 4.6439 0.0155 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,545.286
0
1,545.286
0
0.0376 1,546.226
2
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 27 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 9.5233 45 9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Unmitigated 9.5233 45 9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 28 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 29 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 30 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
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
Apartments Low
Rise
1119.16 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35784.3 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1283.42 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22759.9 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4769.72 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5057.75 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
251.616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 31 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.11916 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35.7843 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1.28342 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22.7599 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4.76972 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5.05775 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
0.251616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 32 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 33 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste 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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 34 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
11.0 Vegetation
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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 35 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0
Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72
Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789
Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 1 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Trips and VMT - Local hire provision
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 2 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 3 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 0.1704 1 8234 1.1577 2.3800e-
003
0.4141 0.0817 0.4958 0.1788 0.0754 0.2542 0 0000 210.7654 210.7654 0.0600 0.0000 212.2661
2022 0.5865 4 0240 5.1546 0 0155 0.9509 0.1175 1.0683 0.2518 0.1103 0.3621 0 0000 1,418.655
4
1,418.655
4
0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692
5
2023 0.5190 3 2850 4.7678 0 0147 0.8497 0.0971 0.9468 0.2283 0.0912 0.3195 0 0000 1,342.441
2
1,342.441
2
0.1115 0.0000 1,345.229
1
2024 4.1592 0.1313 0.2557 5.0000e-
004
0.0221 6.3900e-
003
0.0285 5.8700e-
003
5.9700e-
003
0.0118 0 0000 44.6355 44.6355 7.8300e-
003
0.0000 44.8311
Maximum 4.1592 4.0240 5.1546 0.0155 0.9509 0.1175 1.0683 0.2518 0.1103 0.3621 0.0000 1,418.655
4
1,418.655
4
0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692
5
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 4 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 0.1704 1 8234 1.1577 2.3800e-
003
0.4141 0.0817 0.4958 0.1788 0.0754 0.2542 0 0000 210.7651 210.7651 0.0600 0.0000 212.2658
2022 0.5865 4 0240 5.1546 0 0155 0.9509 0.1175 1.0683 0.2518 0.1103 0.3621 0 0000 1,418.655
0
1,418.655
0
0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692
1
2023 0.5190 3 2850 4.7678 0 0147 0.8497 0.0971 0.9468 0.2283 0.0912 0.3195 0 0000 1,342.440
9
1,342.440
9
0.1115 0.0000 1,345.228
7
2024 4.1592 0.1313 0.2557 5.0000e-
004
0.0221 6.3900e-
003
0.0285 5.8700e-
003
5.9700e-
003
0.0118 0 0000 44.6354 44.6354 7.8300e-
003
0.0000 44.8311
Maximum 4.1592 4.0240 5.1546 0.0155 0.9509 0.1175 1.0683 0.2518 0.1103 0.3621 0.0000 1,418.655
0
1,418.655
0
0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692
1
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 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
1 9-1-2021 11-30-2021 1.4091 1.4091
2 12-1-2021 2-28-2022 1.3329 1.3329
3 3-1-2022 5-31-2022 1.1499 1.1499
4 6-1-2022 8-31-2022 1.1457 1.1457
5 9-1-2022 11-30-2022 1.1415 1.1415
6 12-1-2022 2-28-2023 1.0278 1.0278
7 3-1-2023 5-31-2023 0.9868 0.9868
8 6-1-2023 8-31-2023 0.9831 0.9831
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 5 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Energy 0.1398 1 2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0 0000 3,896.073
2
3,896.073
2
0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283
3
Mobile 1.5857 7 9962 19.1834 0 0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0 0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 0.0000 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 29.1632 556.6420 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Total 6.8692 9.5223 30.3407 0.0914 7.7979 0.2260 8.0240 2.0895 0.2219 2.3114 236.9712 12,294.18
07
12,531.15
19
15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47
51
Unmitigated Operational
9 9-1-2023 11-30-2023 0.9798 0.9798
10 12-1-2023 2-29-2024 2.8757 2.8757
11 3-1-2024 5-31-2024 1.6188 1.6188
Highest 2.8757 2.8757
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 6 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Energy 0.1398 1 2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0 0000 3,896.073
2
3,896.073
2
0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283
3
Mobile 1.5857 7 9962 19.1834 0 0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0 0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 0.0000 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 29.1632 556.6420 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Total 6.8692 9.5223 30.3407 0.0914 7.7979 0.2260 8.0240 2.0895 0.2219 2.3114 236.9712 12,294.18
07
12,531.15
19
15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47
51
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
0.00 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 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 7 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
OffRoad Equipment
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 8 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 9 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5 8000e-
004
0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601
Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004
0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e-
003
0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 10 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 1.9300e-
003
0.0634 0.0148 1 8000e-
004
3.9400e-
003
1.9000e-
004
4.1300e-
003
1.0800e-
003
1.8000e-
004
1.2600e-
003
0.0000 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e-
003
0.0000 17.4869
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 7.2000e-
004
5.3000e-
004
6.0900e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6900e-
003
4.5000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.6000e-
004
0.0000 1.5281 1.5281 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.5293
Total 2.6500e-
003
0.0639 0.0209 2.0000e-
004
5.6200e-
003
2.0000e-
004
5.8200e-
003
1.5300e-
003
1.9000e-
004
1.7200e-
003
0.0000 18.9847 18.9847 1.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0161
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 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 7.5100e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5 8000e-
004
0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600
Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004
0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e-
003
0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 11 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 1.9300e-
003
0.0634 0.0148 1 8000e-
004
3.9400e-
003
1.9000e-
004
4.1300e-
003
1.0800e-
003
1.8000e-
004
1.2600e-
003
0.0000 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e-
003
0.0000 17.4869
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 7.2000e-
004
5.3000e-
004
6.0900e-
003
2 0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6900e-
003
4.5000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.6000e-
004
0.0000 1.5281 1.5281 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.5293
Total 2.6500e-
003
0.0639 0.0209 2.0000e-
004
5.6200e-
003
2.0000e-
004
5.8200e-
003
1.5300e-
003
1.9000e-
004
1.7200e-
003
0.0000 18.9847 18.9847 1.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0161
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.1807 0.0000 0.1807 0.0993 0.0000 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3 8000e-
004
0.0204 0.0204 0.0188 0.0188 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061
Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004
0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 12 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 5.8000e-
004
4.3000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.3400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3500e-
003
3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.2225 1.2225 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.2234
Total 5.8000e-
004
4.3000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3500e-
003
3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.2225 1.2225 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.2234
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 0.1807 0.0000 0.1807 0.0993 0.0000 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3 8000e-
004
0.0204 0.0204 0.0188 0.0188 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060
Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004
0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 13 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 5.8000e-
004
4.3000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.3400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3500e-
003
3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.2225 1.2225 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.2234
Total 5.8000e-
004
4.3000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.3500e-
003
3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.2225 1.2225 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.2234
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 0.0693 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 103.5405 103 5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776
Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5405 103.5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 14 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 1.2200e-
003
9.0000e-
004
0.0103 3 0000e-
005
2.8300e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.8600e-
003
7.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
7.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.5808 2.5808 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.5828
Total 1.2200e-
003
9.0000e-
004
0.0103 3.0000e-
005
2.8300e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.8600e-
003
7.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
7.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.5808 2.5808 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.5828
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 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 0.0693 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 103.5403 103 5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775
Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003
0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5403 103.5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 15 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 1.2200e-
003
9.0000e-
004
0.0103 3 0000e-
005
2.8300e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.8600e-
003
7.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
7.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.5808 2.5808 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.5828
Total 1.2200e-
003
9.0000e-
004
0.0103 3.0000e-
005
2.8300e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.8600e-
003
7.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
7.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.5808 2.5808 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.5828
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0807 0.0000 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2 2000e-
004
5.7200e-
003
5.7200e-
003
5.2600e-
003
5.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004
0.0807 5.7200e-
003
0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e-
003
0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 16 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 2.1000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
1.7400e-
003
1 0000e-
005
5.2000e-
004
0.0000 5.3000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 0.4587 0.4587 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.4590
Total 2.1000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
1.7400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
5.2000e-
004
0.0000 5.3000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 0.4587 0.4587 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.4590
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 0.0807 0.0000 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2 2000e-
004
5.7200e-
003
5.7200e-
003
5.2600e-
003
5.2600e-
003
0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004
0.0807 5.7200e-
003
0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e-
003
0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003
0.0000 19.2414
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 17 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 2.1000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
1.7400e-
003
1 0000e-
005
5.2000e-
004
0.0000 5.3000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 0.4587 0.4587 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.4590
Total 2.1000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
1.7400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
5.2000e-
004
0.0000 5.3000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 0.4587 0.4587 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.4590
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881
Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 18 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.0527 1.6961 0.4580 4 5500e-
003
0.1140 3.1800e-
003
0.1171 0.0329 3.0400e-
003
0.0359 0.0000 441.9835 441 9835 0.0264 0.0000 442.6435
Worker 0.3051 0.2164 2.5233 7 3500e-
003
0.7557 6.2300e-
003
0.7619 0.2007 5.7400e-
003
0.2065 0.0000 663.9936 663 9936 0.0187 0.0000 664.4604
Total 0.3578 1.9125 2.9812 0.0119 0.8696 9.4100e-
003
0.8790 0.2336 8.7800e-
003
0.2424 0.0000 1,105.977
1
1,105.977
1
0.0451 0.0000 1,107.103
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 tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877
Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003
0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 19 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.0527 1.6961 0.4580 4 5500e-
003
0.1140 3.1800e-
003
0.1171 0.0329 3.0400e-
003
0.0359 0.0000 441.9835 441 9835 0.0264 0.0000 442.6435
Worker 0.3051 0.2164 2.5233 7 3500e-
003
0.7557 6.2300e-
003
0.7619 0.2007 5.7400e-
003
0.2065 0.0000 663.9936 663 9936 0.0187 0.0000 664.4604
Total 0.3578 1.9125 2.9812 0.0119 0.8696 9.4100e-
003
0.8790 0.2336 8.7800e-
003
0.2424 0.0000 1,105.977
1
1,105.977
1
0.0451 0.0000 1,107.103
9
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3 3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286 2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814
Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286.2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 20 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.0382 1.2511 0.4011 4 3000e-
003
0.1113 1.4600e-
003
0.1127 0.0321 1.4000e-
003
0.0335 0.0000 417.9930 417 9930 0.0228 0.0000 418.5624
Worker 0.2795 0.1910 2.2635 6 9100e-
003
0.7377 5.9100e-
003
0.7436 0.1960 5.4500e-
003
0.2014 0.0000 624.5363 624 5363 0.0164 0.0000 624.9466
Total 0.3177 1.4420 2.6646 0.0112 0.8490 7.3700e-
003
0.8564 0.2281 6.8500e-
003
0.2349 0.0000 1,042.529
4
1,042.529
4
0.0392 0.0000 1,043.509
0
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 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3 3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286 2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811
Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003
0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286.2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 21 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.0382 1.2511 0.4011 4 3000e-
003
0.1113 1.4600e-
003
0.1127 0.0321 1.4000e-
003
0.0335 0.0000 417.9930 417 9930 0.0228 0.0000 418.5624
Worker 0.2795 0.1910 2.2635 6 9100e-
003
0.7377 5.9100e-
003
0.7436 0.1960 5.4500e-
003
0.2014 0.0000 624.5363 624 5363 0.0164 0.0000 624.9466
Total 0.3177 1.4420 2.6646 0.0112 0.8490 7.3700e-
003
0.8564 0.2281 6.8500e-
003
0.2349 0.0000 1,042.529
4
1,042.529
4
0.0392 0.0000 1,043.509
0
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1 5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 22 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 2.8000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
2.2300e-
003
1 0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.6156 0.6156 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6160
Total 2.8000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
2.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.6156 0.6156 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6160
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 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1 5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 6.7100e-
003
0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004
3.3200e-
003
3.3200e-
003
3.0500e-
003
3.0500e-
003
0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003
0.0000 13.1227
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 23 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 2.8000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
2.2300e-
003
1 0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.6156 0.6156 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6160
Total 2.8000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
2.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.3000e-
004
1.9000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.6156 0.6156 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.6160
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2 5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 24 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 4.4000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
3.5100e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2400e-
003
3.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.0094 1.0094 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0100
Total 4.4000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
3.5100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2400e-
003
3.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.0094 1.0094 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0100
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 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2 5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
5.1500e-
003
4.7400e-
003
4.7400e-
003
0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003
0.0000 22.2073
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 25 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 4.4000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
3.5100e-
003
1 0000e-
005
1.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2400e-
003
3.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.0094 1.0094 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0100
Total 4.4000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
3.5100e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.2400e-
003
3.3000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.0094 1.0094 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0100
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1600e-
003
0.0213 0.0317 5 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 26 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 7.4800e-
003
4.9300e-
003
0.0596 1 9000e-
004
0.0209 1.6000e-
004
0.0211 5.5500e-
003
1.5000e-
004
5.7000e-
003
0.0000 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 17.1394
Total 7.4800e-
003
4.9300e-
003
0.0596 1.9000e-
004
0.0209 1.6000e-
004
0.0211 5.5500e-
003
1.5000e-
004
5.7000e-
003
0.0000 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 17.1394
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 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1600e-
003
0.0213 0.0317 5 0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
1.0700e-
003
0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004
0.0000 4.4745
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 27 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 7.4800e-
003
4.9300e-
003
0.0596 1 9000e-
004
0.0209 1.6000e-
004
0.0211 5.5500e-
003
1.5000e-
004
5.7000e-
003
0.0000 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 17.1394
Total 7.4800e-
003
4.9300e-
003
0.0596 1.9000e-
004
0.0209 1.6000e-
004
0.0211 5.5500e-
003
1.5000e-
004
5.7000e-
003
0.0000 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 17.1394
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 28 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
Unmitigated 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498
6
7,620.498
6
0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 29 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 30 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Electricity
Mitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2,512.646
5
2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Electricity
Unmitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2,512.646
5
2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
7
1,383.426
7
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
7
1,383.426
7
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 31 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
408494 2.2000e-
003
0.0188 8.0100e-
003
1.2000e-
004
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
0.0000 21.7988 21.7988 4.2000e-
004
4.0000e-
004
21.9284
Apartments Mid
Rise
1.30613e
+007
0.0704 0.6018 0.2561 3.8400e-
003
0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 696.9989 696.9989 0.0134 0.0128 701.1408
General Office
Building
468450 2.5300e-
003
0.0230 0.0193 1.4000e-
004
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
0.0000 24.9983 24.9983 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1468
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
8.30736e
+006
0.0448 0.4072 0.3421 2.4400e-
003
0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 443.3124 443.3124 8.5000e-
003
8.1300e-
003
445.9468
Hotel 1.74095e
+006
9.3900e-
003
0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
0.0000 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e-
003
1.7000e-
003
93.4557
Quality
Restaurant
1.84608e
+006
9.9500e-
003
0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e-
004
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e-
003
1.8100e-
003
99.0993
Regional
Shopping Center
91840 5.0000e-
004
4.5000e-
003
3.7800e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 4.9009 4.9009 9.0000e-
005
9.0000e-
005
4.9301
Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
8
1,383.426
8
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 32 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
408494 2.2000e-
003
0.0188 8.0100e-
003
1.2000e-
004
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
1.5200e-
003
0.0000 21.7988 21.7988 4.2000e-
004
4.0000e-
004
21.9284
Apartments Mid
Rise
1.30613e
+007
0.0704 0.6018 0.2561 3.8400e-
003
0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 696.9989 696.9989 0.0134 0.0128 701.1408
General Office
Building
468450 2.5300e-
003
0.0230 0.0193 1.4000e-
004
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
1.7500e-
003
0.0000 24.9983 24.9983 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1468
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
8.30736e
+006
0.0448 0.4072 0.3421 2.4400e-
003
0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 443.3124 443.3124 8.5000e-
003
8.1300e-
003
445.9468
Hotel 1.74095e
+006
9.3900e-
003
0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
6.4900e-
003
0.0000 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e-
003
1.7000e-
003
93.4557
Quality
Restaurant
1.84608e
+006
9.9500e-
003
0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e-
004
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
6.8800e-
003
0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e-
003
1.8100e-
003
99.0993
Regional
Shopping Center
91840 5.0000e-
004
4.5000e-
003
3.7800e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
3.4000e-
004
0.0000 4.9009 4.9009 9.0000e-
005
9.0000e-
005
4.9301
Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003
0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
8
1,383.426
8
0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 33 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
106010 33.7770 1.3900e-
003
2.9000e-
004
33.8978
Apartments Mid
Rise
3.94697e
+006
1,257.587
9
0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086
9
General Office
Building
584550 186.2502 7.6900e-
003
1.5900e-
003
186.9165
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
1.58904e
+006
506.3022 0.0209 4.3200e-
003
508.1135
Hotel 550308 175.3399 7.2400e-
003
1.5000e-
003
175.9672
Quality
Restaurant
353120 112.5116 4.6500e-
003
9.6000e-
004
112.9141
Regional
Shopping Center
756000 240.8778 9.9400e-
003
2.0600e-
003
241.7395
Total 2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 34 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
106010 33.7770 1.3900e-
003
2.9000e-
004
33.8978
Apartments Mid
Rise
3.94697e
+006
1,257.587
9
0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086
9
General Office
Building
584550 186.2502 7.6900e-
003
1.5900e-
003
186.9165
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
1.58904e
+006
506.3022 0.0209 4.3200e-
003
508.1135
Hotel 550308 175.3399 7.2400e-
003
1.5000e-
003
175.9672
Quality
Restaurant
353120 112.5116 4.6500e-
003
9.6000e-
004
112.9141
Regional
Shopping Center
756000 240.8778 9.9400e-
003
2.0600e-
003
241.7395
Total 2,512.646
5
0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 35 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Unmitigated 5.1437 0 2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0 0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
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
0.4137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
4.3998 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0206 0.1763 0.0750 1.1200e-
003
0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0 0000 204.1166 204.1166 3.9100e-
003
3.7400e-
003
205.3295
Landscaping 0.3096 0.1187 10.3054 5.4000e-
004
0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0 0000 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540
Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 36 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
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
0.4137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
4.3998 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0206 0.1763 0.0750 1.1200e-
003
0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0 0000 204.1166 204.1166 3.9100e-
003
3.7400e-
003
205.3295
Landscaping 0.3096 0.1187 10.3054 5.4000e-
004
0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0 0000 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540
Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e-
003
0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e-
003
222.5835
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 37 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 585.8052 3 0183 0.0755 683.7567
Unmitigated 585.8052 3 0183 0.0755 683.7567
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 38 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
1.62885 /
1.02688
10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e-
003
12.6471
Apartments Mid
Rise
63.5252 /
40.0485
425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363
General Office
Building
7.99802 /
4.90201
53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e-
003
61.6019
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
10.9272 /
0.697482
51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e-
003
62.8482
Hotel 1.26834 /
0.140927
6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e-
003
7.5079
Quality
Restaurant
2.42827 /
0.154996
11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e-
003
13.9663
Regional
Shopping Center
4.14806 /
2.54236
27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e-
003
31.9490
Total 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 39 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.62885 /
1.02688
10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e-
003
12.6471
Apartments Mid
Rise
63.5252 /
40.0485
425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363
General Office
Building
7.99802 /
4.90201
53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e-
003
61.6019
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
10.9272 /
0.697482
51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e-
003
62.8482
Hotel 1.26834 /
0.140927
6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e-
003
7.5079
Quality
Restaurant
2.42827 /
0.154996
11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e-
003
13.9663
Regional
Shopping Center
4.14806 /
2.54236
27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e-
003
31.9490
Total 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Mitigated
8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 40 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Unmitigated 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 41 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
11.5 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834
Apartments Mid
Rise
448.5 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 225.5513
General Office
Building
41.85 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 21.0464
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
428.4 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430
Hotel 27.38 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 13.7694
Quality
Restaurant
7.3 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712
Regional
Shopping Center
58.8 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706
Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 42 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
11.5 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834
Apartments Mid
Rise
448.5 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 225.5513
General Office
Building
41.85 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 21.0464
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
428.4 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430
Hotel 27.38 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 13.7694
Quality
Restaurant
7.3 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712
Regional
Shopping Center
58.8 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706
Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Mitigated
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
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 43 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
11.0 Vegetation
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PMPage 44 of 44
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0
Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72
Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789
Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 1 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Trips and VMT - Local hire provision
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 2 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 3 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2561 46.4415 31.4494 0 0636 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0 0000 6,163.416
6
6,163.416
6
1.9475 0.0000 6,212.103
9
2022 4.5441 38.8811 40.8776 0.1240 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0 0000 12,493.44
03
12,493.44
03
1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57
07
2023 4.1534 25.7658 38.7457 0.1206 7.0088 0.7592 7.7679 1.8799 0.7136 2.5935 0 0000 12,150.48
90
12,150.48
90
0.9589 0.0000 12,174.46
15
2024 237.0219 9 5478 14.9642 0 0239 1.2171 0.4694 1.2875 0.3229 0.4319 0.4621 0 0000 2,313.180
8
2,313.180
8
0.7166 0.0000 2,331.095
6
Maximum 237.0219 46.4415 40.8776 0.1240 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 12,493.44
03
12,493.44
03
1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57
07
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 4 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2561 46.4415 31.4494 0 0636 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0 0000 6,163.416
6
6,163.416
6
1.9475 0.0000 6,212.103
9
2022 4.5441 38.8811 40.8776 0.1240 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0 0000 12,493.44
03
12,493.44
03
1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57
07
2023 4.1534 25.7658 38.7457 0.1206 7.0088 0.7592 7.7679 1.8799 0.7136 2.5935 0 0000 12,150.48
90
12,150.48
90
0.9589 0.0000 12,174.46
15
2024 237.0219 9 5478 14.9642 0 0239 1.2171 0.4694 1.2875 0.3229 0.4319 0.4621 0 0000 2,313.180
8
2,313.180
8
0.7166 0.0000 2,331.095
5
Maximum 237.0219 46.4415 40.8776 0.1240 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 12,493.44
03
12,493.44
03
1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57
07
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 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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 5 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Total 41.1168 67.2262 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18
16
76,811.18
16
2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87
86
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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Total 41.1168 67.2262 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18
16
76,811.18
16
2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87
86
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 6 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
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
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 0.00
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 7 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 8 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 9 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241
3
1,292.241
3
0.0877 1,294.433
7
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 0.0487 0.0313 0.4282 1.1800e-
003
0.1141 9.5000e-
004
0.1151 0.0303 8.8000e-
004
0.0311 117.2799 117 2799 3.5200e-
003
117.3678
Total 0.1760 4.1265 1.3884 0.0131 0.3810 0.0135 0.3946 0.1034 0.0129 0.1163 1,409.521
2
1,409.521
2
0.0912 1,411.801
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
Fugitive Dust 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 10 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241
3
1,292.241
3
0.0877 1,294.433
7
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 0.0487 0.0313 0.4282 1.1800e-
003
0.1141 9.5000e-
004
0.1151 0.0303 8.8000e-
004
0.0311 117.2799 117 2799 3.5200e-
003
117.3678
Total 0.1760 4.1265 1.3884 0.0131 0.3810 0.0135 0.3946 0.1034 0.0129 0.1163 1,409.521
2
1,409.521
2
0.0912 1,411.801
5
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 11 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0584 0.0375 0.5139 1.4100e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e-
003
140.8414
Total 0.0584 0.0375 0.5139 1.4100e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e-
003
140.8414
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 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 12 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0584 0.0375 0.5139 1.4100e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e-
003
140.8414
Total 0.0584 0.0375 0.5139 1.4100e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e-
003
140.8414
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 13 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0649 0.0417 0.5710 1 5700e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 156.3732 156 3732 4.6900e-
003
156.4904
Total 0.0649 0.0417 0.5710 1.5700e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 156.3732 156.3732 4.6900e-
003
156.4904
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 14 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0649 0.0417 0.5710 1 5700e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 156.3732 156 3732 4.6900e-
003
156.4904
Total 0.0649 0.0417 0.5710 1.5700e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 156.3732 156.3732 4.6900e-
003
156.4904
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 15 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0607 0.0376 0.5263 1 5100e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 150.8754 150 8754 4.2400e-
003
150.9813
Total 0.0607 0.0376 0.5263 1.5100e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 150.8754 150.8754 4.2400e-
003
150.9813
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 16 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0607 0.0376 0.5263 1 5100e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 150.8754 150 8754 4.2400e-
003
150.9813
Total 0.0607 0.0376 0.5263 1.5100e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 150.8754 150.8754 4.2400e-
003
150.9813
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 17 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4079 13 2032 3.4341 0.0364 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548
2
3,896.548
2
0.2236 3,902.138
4
Worker 2.4299 1.5074 21.0801 0.0607 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 6,042.558
5
6,042.558
5
0.1697 6,046.800
0
Total 2.8378 14.7106 24.5142 0.0971 7.0087 0.0741 7.0828 1.8799 0.0691 1.9490 9,939.106
7
9,939.106
7
0.3933 9,948.938
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 18 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4079 13 2032 3.4341 0.0364 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548
2
3,896.548
2
0.2236 3,902.138
4
Worker 2.4299 1.5074 21.0801 0.0607 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 6,042.558
5
6,042.558
5
0.1697 6,046.800
0
Total 2.8378 14.7106 24.5142 0.0971 7.0087 0.0741 7.0828 1.8799 0.0691 1.9490 9,939.106
7
9,939.106
7
0.3933 9,948.938
4
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 19 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3027 10 0181 3.1014 0.0352 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 3,773.876
2
3,773.876
2
0.1982 3,778.830
0
Worker 2.2780 1.3628 19.4002 0.0584 6.0932 0.0479 6.1411 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 5,821.402
8
5,821.402
8
0.1529 5,825.225
4
Total 2.5807 11.3809 22.5017 0.0936 7.0088 0.0595 7.0682 1.8799 0.0552 1.9350 9,595.279
0
9,595.279
0
0.3511 9,604.055
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 20 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3027 10 0181 3.1014 0.0352 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 3,773.876
2
3,773.876
2
0.1982 3,778.830
0
Worker 2.2780 1.3628 19.4002 0.0584 6.0932 0.0479 6.1411 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 5,821.402
8
5,821.402
8
0.1529 5,825.225
4
Total 2.5807 11.3809 22.5017 0.0936 7.0088 0.0595 7.0682 1.8799 0.0552 1.9350 9,595.279
0
9,595.279
0
0.3511 9,604.055
4
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 21 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0427 0.0255 0.3633 1 0900e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 109.0150 109 0150 2.8600e-
003
109.0866
Total 0.0427 0.0255 0.3633 1.0900e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 109.0150 109.0150 2.8600e-
003
109.0866
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 22 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0427 0.0255 0.3633 1 0900e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 109.0150 109 0150 2.8600e-
003
109.0866
Total 0.0427 0.0255 0.3633 1.0900e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 109.0150 109.0150 2.8600e-
003
109.0866
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 23 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0403 0.0233 0.3384 1 0600e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e-
003
105.6992
Total 0.0403 0.0233 0.3384 1.0600e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e-
003
105.6992
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 24 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0403 0.0233 0.3384 1 0600e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e-
003
105.6992
Total 0.0403 0.0233 0.3384 1.0600e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e-
003
105.6992
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 25 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.4296 0.2481 3.6098 0.0113 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,126.758
3
1,126.758
3
0.0280 1,127.458
3
Total 0.4296 0.2481 3.6098 0.0113 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,126.758
3
1,126.758
3
0.0280 1,127.458
3
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 26 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.4296 0.2481 3.6098 0.0113 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,126.758
3
1,126.758
3
0.0280 1,127.458
3
Total 0.4296 0.2481 3.6098 0.0113 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,126.758
3
1,126.758
3
0.0280 1,127.458
3
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 27 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
Unmitigated 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60
34
50,306.60
34
2.1807 50,361.12
08
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 28 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 29 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 30 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
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
Apartments Low
Rise
1119.16 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35784.3 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1283.42 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22759.9 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4769.72 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5057.75 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
251.616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 31 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.11916 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35.7843 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1.28342 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22.7599 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4.76972 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5.05775 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
0.251616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 32 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 33 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste 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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 34 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
11.0 Vegetation
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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PMPage 35 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0
Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72
Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789
Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 1 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.
Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.
Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.
Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.
Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.
Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.
Trips and VMT - Local hire provision
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 2 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 3 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2621 46.4460 31.4068 0 0635 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0 0000 6,154.337
7
6,154.337
7
1.9472 0.0000 6,203.018
6
2022 4.7966 38.8851 39.6338 0.1195 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0 0000 12,035.34
40
12,035.34
40
1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60
13
2023 4.3939 25.8648 37.5031 0.1162 7.0088 0.7598 7.7685 1.8799 0.7142 2.5940 0 0000 11,710.40
80
11,710.40
80
0.9617 0.0000 11,734.44
97
2024 237.0656 9 5503 14.9372 0 0238 1.2171 0.4694 1.2875 0.3229 0.4319 0.4621 0 0000 2,307.051
7
2,307.051
7
0.7164 0.0000 2,324.962
7
Maximum 237.0656 46.4460 39.6338 0.1195 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 12,035.34
40
12,035.34
40
1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60
13
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 4 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
2021 4.2621 46.4460 31.4068 0 0635 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0 0000 6,154.337
7
6,154.337
7
1.9472 0.0000 6,203.018
6
2022 4.7966 38.8851 39.6338 0.1195 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0 0000 12,035.34
40
12,035.34
40
1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60
13
2023 4.3939 25.8648 37.5031 0.1162 7.0088 0.7598 7.7685 1.8799 0.7142 2.5940 0 0000 11,710.40
80
11,710.40
80
0.9617 0.0000 11,734.44
97
2024 237.0656 9 5503 14.9372 0 0238 1.2171 0.4694 1.2875 0.3229 0.4319 0.4621 0 0000 2,307.051
7
2,307.051
7
0.7164 0.0000 2,324.962
7
Maximum 237.0656 46.4460 39.6338 0.1195 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 12,035.34
40
12,035.34
40
1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60
13
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 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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 5 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.5233 45.9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Total 40.7912 67.7872 202.7424 0.6043 45.9592 2.4640 48.4231 12.2950 2.4399 14.7349 0.0000 74,422.37
87
74,422.37
87
2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44
17
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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0 0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mobile 9.5233 45.9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Total 40.7912 67.7872 202.7424 0.6043 45.9592 2.4640 48.4231 12.2950 2.4399 14.7349 0.0000 74,422.37
87
74,422.37
87
2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44
17
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 6 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20
3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500
5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35
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
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 0.00
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 7 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 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 Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 8 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
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
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 9 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855
5
1,269.855
5
0.0908 1,272.125
2
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 0.0532 0.0346 0.3963 1.1100e-
003
0.1141 9.5000e-
004
0.1151 0.0303 8.8000e-
004
0.0311 110.4707 110.4707 3.3300e-
003
110.5539
Total 0.1835 4.1800 1.4144 0.0128 0.3810 0.0137 0.3948 0.1034 0.0131 0.1165 1,380.326
2
1,380.326
2
0.0941 1,382.679
1
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 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 0.0000 3,747.944
9
3,747.944
9
1.0549 3,774.317
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 10 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2021
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 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855
5
1,269.855
5
0.0908 1,272.125
2
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 0.0532 0.0346 0.3963 1.1100e-
003
0.1141 9.5000e-
004
0.1151 0.0303 8.8000e-
004
0.0311 110.4707 110.4707 3.3300e-
003
110.5539
Total 0.1835 4.1800 1.4144 0.0128 0.3810 0.0137 0.3948 0.1034 0.0131 0.1165 1,380.326
2
1,380.326
2
0.0941 1,382.679
1
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 11 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0638 0.0415 0.4755 1 3300e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 132.5649 132 5649 3.9900e-
003
132.6646
Total 0.0638 0.0415 0.4755 1.3300e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 132.5649 132.5649 3.9900e-
003
132.6646
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 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 0.0000 3,685.656
9
3,685.656
9
1.1920 3,715.457
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 12 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
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 0.0638 0.0415 0.4755 1 3300e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 132.5649 132 5649 3.9900e-
003
132.6646
Total 0.0638 0.0415 0.4755 1.3300e-
003
0.1369 1.1400e-
003
0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e-
003
0.0374 132.5649 132.5649 3.9900e-
003
132.6646
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 13 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0709 0.0462 0.5284 1.4800e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 147.2943 147 2943 4.4300e-
003
147.4051
Total 0.0709 0.0462 0.5284 1.4800e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 147.2943 147.2943 4.4300e-
003
147.4051
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.1912 46 3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 0.0000 6,007.043
4
6,007.043
4
1.9428 6,055.613
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 14 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2021
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 0.0709 0.0462 0.5284 1.4800e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 147.2943 147 2943 4.4300e-
003
147.4051
Total 0.0709 0.0462 0.5284 1.4800e-
003
0.1521 1.2700e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e-
003
0.0415 147.2943 147.2943 4.4300e-
003
147.4051
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 15 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0665 0.0416 0.4861 1.4300e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.0000e-
003
142.2207
Total 0.0665 0.0416 0.4861 1.4300e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.0000e-
003
142.2207
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 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.6248 38 8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 0.0000 6,011.410
5
6,011.410
5
1.9442 6,060.015
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 16 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2022
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 0.0665 0.0416 0.4861 1.4300e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.0000e-
003
142.2207
Total 0.0665 0.0416 0.4861 1.4300e-
003
0.1521 1.2300e-
003
0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e-
003
0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.0000e-
003
142.2207
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 17 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4284 13.1673 3.8005 0.0354 0.9155 0.0256 0.9412 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075
0
3,789.075
0
0.2381 3,795.028
3
Worker 2.6620 1.6677 19.4699 0.0571 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 5,691.935
4
5,691.935
4
0.1602 5,695.940
8
Total 3.0904 14.8350 23.2704 0.0926 7.0087 0.0749 7.0836 1.8799 0.0699 1.9498 9,481.010
4
9,481.010
4
0.3984 9,490.969
1
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 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 18 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2022
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 0.4284 13.1673 3.8005 0.0354 0.9155 0.0256 0.9412 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075
0
3,789.075
0
0.2381 3,795.028
3
Worker 2.6620 1.6677 19.4699 0.0571 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 5,691.935
4
5,691.935
4
0.1602 5,695.940
8
Total 3.0904 14.8350 23.2704 0.0926 7.0087 0.0749 7.0836 1.8799 0.0699 1.9498 9,481.010
4
9,481.010
4
0.3984 9,490.969
1
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 19 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3183 9.9726 3.3771 0.0343 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 3,671.400
7
3,671.400
7
0.2096 3,676.641
7
Worker 2.5029 1.5073 17.8820 0.0550 6.0932 0.0479 6.1411 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 5,483.797
4
5,483.797
4
0.1442 5,487.402
0
Total 2.8211 11.4799 21.2591 0.0893 7.0088 0.0601 7.0688 1.8799 0.0557 1.9356 9,155.198
1
9,155.198
1
0.3538 9,164.043
7
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 1.5728 14 3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 20 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.3183 9.9726 3.3771 0.0343 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 3,671.400
7
3,671.400
7
0.2096 3,676.641
7
Worker 2.5029 1.5073 17.8820 0.0550 6.0932 0.0479 6.1411 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 5,483.797
4
5,483.797
4
0.1442 5,487.402
0
Total 2.8211 11.4799 21.2591 0.0893 7.0088 0.0601 7.0688 1.8799 0.0557 1.9356 9,155.198
1
9,155.198
1
0.3538 9,164.043
7
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 21 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0469 0.0282 0.3349 1 0300e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e-
003
102.7603
Total 0.0469 0.0282 0.3349 1.0300e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e-
003
102.7603
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 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584
1
2,207.584
1
0.7140 2,225.433
6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 22 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2023
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 0.0469 0.0282 0.3349 1 0300e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e-
003
102.7603
Total 0.0469 0.0282 0.3349 1.0300e-
003
0.1141 9.0000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e-
004
0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e-
003
102.7603
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 23 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1 0000e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e-
003
99.5663
Total 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1.0000e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e-
003
99.5663
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 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547
2
2,207.547
2
0.7140 2,225.396
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 24 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2024
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 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1 0000e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e-
003
99.5663
Total 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1.0000e-
003
0.1141 8.8000e-
004
0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e-
004
0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e-
003
99.5663
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 25 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.4734 0.2743 3.3220 0.0107 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,061.381
8
1,061.381
8
0.0264 1,062.041
0
Total 0.4734 0.2743 3.3220 0.0107 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,061.381
8
1,061.381
8
0.0264 1,062.041
0
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 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2 9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 26 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
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 0.4734 0.2743 3.3220 0.0107 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,061.381
8
1,061.381
8
0.0264 1,062.041
0
Total 0.4734 0.2743 3.3220 0.0107 1.2171 9.4300e-
003
1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e-
003
0.3315 1,061.381
8
1,061.381
8
0.0264 1,062.041
0
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 27 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 9.5233 45 9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
Unmitigated 9.5233 45 9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80
05
47,917.80
05
2.1953 47,972.68
39
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
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227
Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065
General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant)2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937
Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488
Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221
Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 28 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
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
Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3
General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4
High Turnover (Sit Down
R t )
16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44
Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 29 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 30 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
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
Apartments Low
Rise
1119.16 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35784.3 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1283.42 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22759.9 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4769.72 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5057.75 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
251.616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 31 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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
Apartments Low
Rise
1.11916 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003
2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35.7843 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916
4
4,209.916
4
0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9
General Office
Building
1.28342 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003
2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22.7599 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634
2
2,677.634
2
0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0
Hotel 4.76972 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782
Quality
Restaurant
5.05775 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003
0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658
Regional
Shopping Center
0.251616 2.7100e-
003
0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
1.8700e-
003
29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004
5.4000e-
004
29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983
2
8,355.983
2
0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 32 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, 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 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0 0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0 0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 33 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste 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
2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0 0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0 0000 18,000.00
00
18,000.00
00
0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50
Landscaping 2.4766 0 9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003
0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542
Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59
50
18,148.59
50
0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 34 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
11.0 Vegetation
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.2016.3.2 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PMPage 35 of 35
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e)3,623
Amortized (MT CO2e/year) 120.77
Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e)3,024
Amortized (MT CO2e/year) 100.80
% Decrease in Construction-related GHG Emissions 17%
Local Hire Provision Net Change
With Local Hire Provision
Without Local Hire Provision
Attachment C
EXHIBIT B
SOIL WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, California 90405
Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
Mobil: (310) 795-2335
Office: (310) 452-5555
Fax: (310) 452-5550
Email: prosenfeld@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 1 of 10 June 2019
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling
Principal Environmental Chemist Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist
Education
Ph.D. Soil Chemistry, University of Washington, 1999. Dissertation on volatile organic compound filtration.
M.S. Environmental Science, U.C. Berkeley, 1995. Thesis on organic waste economics.
B.A. Environmental Studies, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1991. Thesis on wastewater treatment.
Professional Experience
Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years’ experience conducting environmental investigations and risk assessments for
evaluating impacts to human health, property, and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and
transport of environmental contaminants, human health risk, exposure assessment, and ecological restoration. Dr.
Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from unconventional oil drilling operations, oil spills, landfills,
boilers and incinerators, process stacks, storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, and many other industrial
and agricultural sources. His project experience ranges from monitoring and modeling of pollution sources to
evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at industrial facilities and residents in surrounding communities.
Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk assessments for contaminated sites
containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria, particulate matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents,
pesticides, radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs, PAHs, perchlorate,
asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS), unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates (MTBE), among
other pollutants. Dr. Rosenfeld also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from various projects and is
an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as the evaluation of odor nuisance
impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous emissions. As a principal scientist at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld
directs air dispersion modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert witness and testified about
pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at dozens of sites and has testified as an expert witness on
more than ten cases involving exposure to air contaminants from industrial sources.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 10 June 2019
Professional History:
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner
UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher)
UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor
UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator
UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate
Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist
National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor
Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager
Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager
Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 – 2000; Risk Assessor
King County, Seattle, 1996 – 1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist
Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist
Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist
Publications:
Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil
Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48
Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property
Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342
Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C.,
(2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated
Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632.
Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks of Hazardous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and
Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL.
Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113–125.
Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and
Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal
of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living
near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air
Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 10 June 2019
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid
Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two
Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255.
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins
And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527-
000530.
Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near
a Former Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197.
Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for
Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357.
Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater,
Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344.
Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food,
Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science
and Technology. 49(9),171-178.
Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor-Quality-Wheel Classification Scheme
For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation’s Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC)
2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities,
and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science
and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from
Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using
High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management
Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS–6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water
Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal
of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor
emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research. 73(4), 363-367.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and
Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor.
Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 10 June 2019
Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and
distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users
Network, 7(1).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids
Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters
thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third
World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California.
Presentations:
Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile
organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American
Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA.
Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.;
Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water.
Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse,
R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis,
Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS)
Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United
States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting, Lecture conducted
from Tuscon, AZ.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United
States” Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the
United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture
conducted from Tuscon, AZ.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in
populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air
Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and
Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing
Facility. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from
University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium-Contaminated Water Into A
Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23rd Annual International
Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst
MA.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 10 June 2019
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment
Facility Emissions. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted
from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3-
Trichloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting . Lecture
conducted from San Diego, CA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAH, and Metal Exposure in Florala,
Alabama. The AEHS Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 – 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on
Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants – DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia
Hotel in Oslo Norway.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. APHA 134 Annual Meeting &
Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
Mealey’s C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel,
Philadelphia, PA.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton
Hotel, Irvine California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA
Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey’s Groundwater
Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from
Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related
Perfluorochemicals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Law Conference.
Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water and
Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability
and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundwater Association. Environmental
Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust.
Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona.
Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River.
Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 10 June 2019
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners.
Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento,
California.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh
International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical
Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus
Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California
CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA
Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and
Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water
Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.
Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association . Lecture
conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 11-14, 2002). Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a
Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from
Indianapolis, Maryland.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Water
Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted
from Ocean Shores, California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery
Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil
Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from
Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldwell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from
Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 10 June 2019
Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three
Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim
California.
Teaching Experience:
UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science
100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on
the health effects of environmental contaminants.
National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Sante Fe, New
Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage
tanks.
National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1,
2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.
California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San
Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.
UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation
Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.
University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry,
Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.
U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.
Academic Grants Awarded:
California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.
Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.
Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.
Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.
King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of
Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on
VOC emissions. 1998.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of
polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.
James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered
Poplar trees with resistance to round-up. 1996.
United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the
Tahoe National Forest. 1995.
Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts
in West Indies. 1993
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 10 June 2019
Deposition and/or Trial Testimony:
In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey
Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant.
Case No.: 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition. 6-7-2019
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division
M/T Carla Maersk, Plaintiffs, vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS “Conti Perdido”
Defendant.
Case No.: 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237
Rosenfeld Deposition. 5-9-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
Carole-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC615636
Rosenfeld Deposition, 1-26-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC646857
Rosenfeld Deposition, 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19
In United States District Court For The District of Colorado
Bells et al. Plaintiff vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants
Case: No 1:16-cv-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition, 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018
In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 112th Judicial District
Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants
Cause No 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-17-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa
Simons et al., Plaintiffs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants
Cause No C12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-20-2017
In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois
Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-23-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles
Warrn Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC
Case No.: LC102019 (c/w BC582154)
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018
In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division
Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2017
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 10 June 2019
In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish
Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 13-2-03987-5
Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017
Trial, March 2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda
Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants
Case No.: RG14711115
Rosenfeld Deposition, September 2015
In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants
Case No.: LALA002187
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Jerry Dovico, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Valley View Sine LLC, et al., Defendants
Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Doug Pauls, et al.,, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Richard Warren, et al., Defendants
Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia
Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al.
Civil Action N0. 14-C-30000
Rosenfeld Deposition, June 2015
In The Third Judicial District County of Dona Ana, New Mexico
Betty Gonzalez, et al. Plaintiffs vs. Del Oro Dairy, Del Oro Real Estate LLC, Jerry Settles and Deward
DeRuyter, Defendants
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Muscatine County
Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant
Case No 4980
Rosenfeld Deposition: May 2015
In the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida
Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant.
Case Number CACE07030358 (26)
Rosenfeld Deposition: December 2014
In the United States District Court Western District of Oklahoma
Tommy McCarty, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Oklahoma City Landfill, LLC d/b/a Southeast Oklahoma City
Landfill, et al. Defendants.
Case No. 5:12-cv-01152-C
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2014
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 10 June 2019
In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.
Case Number cc-11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987)
Rosenfeld Deposition: October 2012
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division
Kyle Cannon, Eugene Donovan, Genaro Ramirez, Carol Sassler, and Harvey Walton, each Individually and
on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. BP Products North America, Inc., Defendant.
Case 3:10-cv-00622
Rosenfeld Deposition: February 2012
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2013
In the Circuit Court of Baltimore County Maryland
Philip E. Cvach, II et al., Plaintiffs vs. Two Farms, Inc. d/b/a Royal Farms, Defendants
Case Number: 03-C-12-012487 OT
Rosenfeld Deposition: September 2013
EXHIBIT C
1640 5th St.., Suite 204 Santa
Santa Monica, California 90401
Tel: (949) 887‐9013
Email: mhagemann@swape.com
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
CEQA Review
Education:
M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984.
B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 1982.
Professional Certifications:
California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:
Matt has 25 years of experience in environmental policy, assessment and remediation. He spent nine
years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science
Policy Advisor in the Western Regional Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from
perchlorate and MTBE. While with EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of
the assessment of seven major military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement
actions under provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) while also working
with permit holders to improve hydrogeologic characterization and water quality monitoring.
Matt has worked closely with U.S. EPA legal counsel and the technical staff of several states in the
application and enforcement of RCRA, Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act regulations. Matt
has trained the technical staff in the States of California, Hawaii, Nevada, Arizona and the Territory of
Guam in the conduct of investigations, groundwater fundamentals, and sampling techniques.
Positions Matt has held include:
•Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 – present);
•Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 – 2014;
•Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 ‐‐ 2003);
• Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001 – 2004);
• Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989–
1998);
• Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 – 2000);
• Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 –
1998);
• Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990 – 1995);
• Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986 – 1998); and
• Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984 – 1986).
Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:
With SWAPE, Matt’s responsibilities have included:
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 100 environmental impact reports
since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard to hazardous waste, water
resources, water quality, air quality, Valley Fever, greenhouse gas emissions, and geologic
hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead agencies at the
local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks and
implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from toxins
and Valley Fever.
• Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at industrial facilities.
• Manager of a project to provide technical assistance to a community adjacent to a former
Naval shipyard under a grant from the U.S. EPA.
• Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns.
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications
for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission.
• Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S.
• Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in
Southern California drinking water wells.
• Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the
review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas
stations throughout California.
• Expert witness on two cases involving MTBE litigation.
• Expert witness and litigation support on the impact of air toxins and hazards at a school.
• Expert witness in litigation at a former plywood plant.
With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt’s duties included the following:
• Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony
by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking
water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony
against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies.
• Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by
MTBE in California and New York.
2
• Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production‐related contamination in Mississippi.
• Lead author for a multi‐volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los
Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines.
3
• Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with
clients and regulators.
Executive Director:
As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange
County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of
wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange
County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection
of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the
development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the
discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including
Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business
institutions including the Orange County Business Council.
Hydrogeology:
As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to
characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point
Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army
Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
• Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of
monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and
groundwater.
• Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory
analysis at military bases.
• Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation
development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.
At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of
groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to
show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and
County of Maui.
As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the
Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included
the following:
• Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for
the protection of drinking water.
• Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities
through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports,
conducted public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very
concerned about the impact of designation.
4
• Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments,
including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water
transfer.
Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
• Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance
with Subtitle C requirements.
• Reviewed and wrote ʺpart Bʺ permits for the disposal of hazardous waste.
• Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed
the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.
EPA legal counsel.
• Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor’s investigations of waste sites.
With the National Park Service, Matt directed service‐wide investigations of contaminant sources to
prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
• Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the
Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants.
• Conducted watershed‐scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and
Olympic National Park.
• Identified high‐levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico
and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA.
• Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a
national workgroup.
• Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while
serving on a national workgroup.
• Co‐authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal
watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation‐
wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks.
• Contributed to the Federal Multi‐Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water
Action Plan.
Policy:
Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 9. Activities included the following:
• Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the
potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking
water supplies.
• Shaped EPA’s national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing
to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in
Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
• Improved the technical training of EPAʹs scientific and engineering staff.
• Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region’s 300 scientists and engineers in
negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific
principles into the policy‐making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents.
5
Geology:
With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for
timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
• Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical
models to determine slope stability.
• Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource
protection.
• Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the
city of Medford, Oregon.
As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later
listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern
Oregon. Duties included the following:
• Supervised year‐long effort for soil and groundwater sampling.
• Conducted aquifer tests.
• Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.
Teaching:
From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university
levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in
environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater
contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students.
• Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.
Matt taught physical geology (lecture and lab and introductory geology at Golden West College in
Huntington Beach, California from 2010 to 2014.
Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public
Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.
EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.
Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and
Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las
Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at
schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.
6
Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE
Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.
Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater
Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust,
Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy
of Sciences, Irvine, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water
Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter‐Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.
Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited
presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of
the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a
meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address
Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental
Journalists.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater
(and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage
Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and
State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished
report.
7
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.
Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks. Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential Water Quality Concerns Related
to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft
Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright
Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.
Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air
Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.
Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic
Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui,
October 1996.
Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu,
Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air
and Waste Management Association Publication VIP‐61.
Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Characterization and Cleanup a t Closing Military Bases
in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater
Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of
Groundwater.
Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL‐
contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
8
Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of
Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.
Other Experience:
Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examination, 2009‐
2011.
9
EXHIBIT D
P: (626) 381-9248
F: (626) 389-5414
E: info@mitchtsailaw.com
Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorney At Law
155 South El Molino Avenue
Suite 104
Pasadena, California 91101
VIA E-MAIL
August 5, 2021
Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253
Em: consultingplanner@laquintaca.gov
RE: Coral Mountain Resort (SCH #2021020310) – Comments on Draft
Environmental Impact Report
Dear Nucole Sauviat Criste,
On behalf of the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (“Commenters” or
“Southwest Carpenters”), my Office is submitting these comments on the City of
La Quinta’s (“City” or “Lead Agency”) Draft Environmental Impact Report
(“DEIR”) (SCH No. 2021020310) for the proposed Coral Mountain Resort Project
(“Project”).
The City proposes to adopt the Project, carving out 386 acres of a 929-acre area of
the City, to promote future development of the Coral Mountain Resort. The Project
would allow for the development of 600 residential units, a 150-room resort hotel
plus complementary uses and amenities, a recreational surf facility, 57,000 square feet
of commercial development, 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses,
and 23.6 acres of recreational uses. As part of the Project, the City would initiate a
general plan amendment and zoning change to designate the Project area for “Tourist
Commercial” uses; a specific plan amendment to exclude the Project area from a
previous specific plan; the adoption of the Project’s specific plan; the adoption of a
tentative tract map; site development permits; and the adoption of a development
agreement with the Project applicant.
The Southwest Carpenters is a labor union representing more than 50,000 union
carpenters in six states and has a strong interest in well ordered land use planning and
addressing the environmental impacts of development projects.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 2 of 33
Individual members of the Southwest Carpenters live, work, and recreate in the City
and surrounding communities and would be directly affected by the Project’s
environmental impacts.
Commenters expressly reserve the right to supplement these comments at or prior to
hearings on the Project, and at any later hearings and proceedings related to this
Project. Cal. Gov. Code § 65009(b); Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21177(a); Bakersfield Citizens
for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 1184, 1199-1203; see Galante
Vineyards v. Monterey Water Dist. (1997) 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121.
Commenters incorporate by reference all comments raising issues regarding the EIR
submitted prior to certification of the EIR for the Project. Citizens for Clean Energy v
City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal. App. 4th 173, 191 (finding that any party who has
objected to the Project’s environmental documentation may assert any issue timely
raised by other parties).
Moreover, Commenters request that the Lead Agency provide notice for any and all
notices referring or related to the Project issued under the California Environmental
Quality Act (“CEQA”), Cal Public Resources Code (“PRC”) § 21000 et seq, and the
California Planning and Zoning Law (“Planning and Zoning Law”), Cal. Gov’t
Code §§ 65000–65010. California Public Resources Code Sections 21092.2, and
21167(f) and Government Code Section 65092 require agencies to mail such notices
to any person who has filed a written request for them with the clerk of the agency’s
governing body.
The City should require the Applicant provide additional community benefits such as
requiring local hire and use of a skilled and trained workforce to build the Project.
The City should require the use of workers who have graduated from a Joint Labor
Management apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California, or
have at least as many hours of on-the-job experience in the applicable craft which
would be required to graduate from such a state approved apprenticeship training
program or who are registered apprentices in an apprenticeship training program
approved by the State of California.
Community benefits such as local hire and skilled and trained workforce requirements
can also be helpful to reduce environmental impacts and improve the positive
economic impact of the Project. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain
percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 3 of 33
length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized
economic benefits. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of
workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of
vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic
benefits. As environmental consultants Matt Hagemann and Paul E. Rosenfeld note:
[A]ny local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length
from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of
construction-related GHG emissions, though the significance of the
reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the
project site.
March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and
Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling.
Skilled and trained workforce requirements promote the development of skilled trades
that yield sustainable economic development. As the California Workforce
Development Board and the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
concluded:
. . . labor should be considered an investment rather than a cost – and
investments in growing, diversifying, and upskilling California’s workforce
can positively affect returns on climate mitigation efforts. In other words,
well trained workers are key to delivering emissions reductions and
moving California closer to its climate targets.1
Recently, on May 7, 2021, the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that
that the “[u]se of a local state-certified apprenticeship program or a skilled and trained
workforce with a local hire component” can result in air pollutant reductions.2
Cities are increasingly adopting local skilled and trained workforce policies and
requirements into general plans and municipal codes. For example, the City of
Hayward 2040 General Plan requires the City to “promote local hiring . . . to help
1 California Workforce Development Board (2020) Putting California on the High Road: A Jobs and Climate Action
Plan for 2030 at p. ii, available at https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Putting-California-on-
the-High-Road.pdf
2 South Coast Air Quality Management District (May 7, 2021) Certify Final Environmental Assessment and Adopt
Proposed Rule 2305 – Warehouse Indirect Source Rule – Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions
Program, and Proposed Rule 316 – Fees for Rule 2305, Submit Rule 2305 for Inclusion Into the SIP, and Approve
Supporting Budget Actions, available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/Governing-
Board/2021/2021-May7-027.pdf?sfvrsn=10
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 4 of 33
achieve a more positive jobs-housing balance, and reduce regional commuting, gas
consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions.”3
In fact, the City of Hayward has gone as far as to adopt a Skilled Labor Force policy
into its Downtown Specific Plan and municipal code, requiring developments in its
Downtown area to requiring that the City “[c]ontribute to the stabilization of regional
construction markets by spurring applicants of housing and nonresidential
developments to require contractors to utilize apprentices from state-approved, joint
labor-management training programs, . . .”4 In addition, the City of Hayward requires
all projects 30,000 square feet or larger to “utilize apprentices from state-approved,
joint labor-management training programs.”5
Locating jobs closer to residential areas can have significant environmental benefits.
As the California Planning Roundtable noted in 2008:
People who live and work in the same jurisdiction would be more likely
to take transit, walk, or bicycle to work than residents of less balanced
communities and their vehicle trips would be shorter. Benefits would
include potential reductions in both vehicle miles traveled and vehicle
hours traveled.6
In addition, local hire mandates as well as skill training are critical facets of a strategy
to reduce vehicle miles traveled. As planning experts Robert Cervero and Michael
Duncan noted, simply placing jobs near housing stock is insufficient to achieve VMT
reductions since the skill requirements of available local jobs must be matched to
those held by local residents.7 Some municipalities have tied local hire and skilled and
trained workforce policies to local development permits to address transportation
issues. As Cervero and Duncan note:
In nearly built-out Berkeley, CA, the approach to balancing jobs and
housing is to create local jobs rather than to develop new housing.” The
3 City of Hayward (2014) Hayward 2040 General Plan Policy Document at p. 3-99, available at https://www.hayward-
ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/General Plan FINAL.pdf.
4 City of Hayward (2019) Hayward Downtown Specific Plan at p. 5-24, available at https://www.hayward-
ca.gov/sites/default/files/Hayward%20Downtown%
20Specific%20Plan.pdf.
5 City of Hayward Municipal Code, Chapter 10, § 28.5.3.020(C).
6 California Planning Roundtable (2008) Deconstructing Jobs-Housing Balance at p. 6, available at
https://cproundtable.org/static/media/uploads/publications/cpr-jobs-housing.pdf
7 Cervero, Robert and Duncan, Michael (2006) Which Reduces Vehicle Travel More: Jobs-Housing Balance or Retail-
Housing Mixing? Journal of the American Planning Association 72 (4), 475-490, 482, available at
http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/UTCT-825.pdf.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 5 of 33
city’s First Source program encourages businesses to hire local residents,
especially for entry- and intermediate-level jobs, and sponsors vocational
training to ensure residents are employment-ready. While the program is
voluntary, some 300 businesses have used it to date, placing more than
3,000 city residents in local jobs since it was launched in 1986. When
needed, these carrots are matched by sticks, since the city is not shy about
negotiating corporate participation in First Source as a condition of
approval for development permits.
The City should consider utilizing skilled and trained workforce policies and
requirements to benefit the local area economically and mitigate greenhouse gas, air
quality and transportation impacts.
The City should also require the Project to be built to standards exceeding the current
2019 California Green Building Code to mitigate the Project’s environmental impacts
and to advance progress towards the State of California’s environmental goals.
I. THE PROJECT WOULD BE APPROVED IN VIOLATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
A. Background Concerning the California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA has two basic purposes. First, CEQA is designed to inform decision makers
and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project. 14
California Code of Regulations (“CCR” or “CEQA Guidelines”) § 15002(a)(1).8 “Its
purpose is to inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental
consequences of their decisions before they are made. Thus, the EIR ‘protects not only
the environment but also informed self-government.’ [Citation.]” Citizens of Goleta
Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 553, 564. The EIR has been described as
“an environmental ‘alarm bell’ whose purpose it is to alert the public and its
responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached ecological
points of no return.” Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay v. Bd. of Port Comm’rs. (2001) 91 Cal.
App. 4th 1344, 1354 (“Berkeley Jets”); County of Inyo v. Yorty (1973) 32 Cal. App. 3d 795,
810.
8 The CEQA Guidelines, codified in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, section 150000 et seq, are regulatory
guidelines promulgated by the state Natural Resources Agency for the implementation of CEQA. (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §
21083.) The CEQA Guidelines are given “great weight in interpreting CEQA except when . . . clearly unauthorized or
erroneous.” Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal. 4th 204, 217.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 6 of 33
Second, CEQA directs public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage
when possible by requiring alternatives or mitigation measures. CEQA Guidelines §
15002(a)(2) and (3). See also, Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal. App. 4th 1344, 1354; Citizens of Goleta
Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553; Laurel Heights Improvement Ass’n v.
Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 400. The EIR serves to
provide public agencies and the public in general with information about the effect
that a proposed project is likely to have on the environment and to “identify ways that
environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced.” CEQA Guidelines §
15002(a)(2). If the project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may
approve the project only upon finding that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened
all significant effects on the environment where feasible” and that any unavoidable
significant effects on the environment are “acceptable due to overriding concerns”
specified in CEQA section 21081. CEQA Guidelines § 15092(b)(2)(A–B).
While the courts review an EIR using an “abuse of discretion” standard, “the
reviewing court is not to ‘uncritically rely on every study or analysis presented by a
project proponent in support of its position.’ A ‘clearly inadequate or unsupported
study is entitled to no judicial deference.’” Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1355
(emphasis added) (quoting Laurel Heights, 47 Cal.3d at 391, 409 fn. 12). Drawing this
line and determining whether the EIR complies with CEQA’s information disclosure
requirements presents a question of law subject to independent review by the courts.
Sierra Club v. Cnty. of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal. 5th 502, 515; Madera Oversight Coalition, Inc. v.
County of Madera (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 48, 102, 131. As the court stated in Berkeley
Jets, 91 Cal. App. 4th at 1355:
A prejudicial abuse of discretion occurs “if the failure to include relevant
information precludes informed decision-making and informed public
participation, thereby thwarting the statutory goals of the EIR process.
The preparation and circulation of an EIR is more than a set of technical hurdles for
agencies and developers to overcome. The EIR’s function is to ensure that
government officials who decide to build or approve a project do so with a full
understanding of the environmental consequences and, equally important, that the
public is assured those consequences have been considered. For the EIR to serve
these goals it must present information so that the foreseeable impacts of pursuing
the project can be understood and weighed, and the public must be given an adequate
opportunity to comment on that presentation before the decision to go forward is
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 7 of 33
made. Communities for a Better Environment v. Richmond (2010) 184 Cal. App. 4th 70, 80
(quoting Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007)
40 Cal.4th 412, 449–450).
B. CEQA Requires Revision and Recirculation of an Environmental Impact
Report When Substantial Changes or New Information Comes to Light
Section 21092.1 of the California Public Resources Code requires that “[w]hen
significant new information is added to an environmental impact report after notice
has been given pursuant to Section 21092 … but prior to certification, the public
agency shall give notice again pursuant to Section 21092, and consult again pursuant
to Sections 21104 and 21153 before certifying the environmental impact report” in
order to give the public a chance to review and comment upon the information.
CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5.
Significant new information includes “changes in the project or environmental
setting as well as additional data or other information” that “deprives the public of a
meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect
of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a
feasible project alternative).” CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5(a). Examples of significant
new information requiring recirculation include “new significant environmental
impacts from the project or from a new mitigation measure,” “substantial increase in
the severity of an environmental impact,” “feasible project alternative or mitigation
measure considerably different from others previously analyzed” as well as when “the
draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature
that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.” Id.
An agency has an obligation to recirculate an environmental impact report for public
notice and comment due to “significant new information” regardless of whether the
agency opts to include it in a project’s environmental impact report. Cadiz Land Co. v.
Rail Cycle (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 74, 95 [finding that in light of a new expert report
disclosing potentially significant impacts to groundwater supply “the EIR should have
been revised and recirculated for purposes of informing the public and governmental
agencies of the volume of groundwater at risk and to allow the public and
governmental agencies to respond to such information.”]. If significant new
information was brought to the attention of an agency prior to certification, an agency
is required to revise and recirculate that information as part of the environmental
impact report.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 8 of 33
C. Due to the COVID-19 Crisis, the City Must Adopt a Mandatory Finding
of Significance that the Project May Cause a Substantial Adverse Effect
on Human Beings and Mitigate COVID-19 Impacts
CEQA requires that an agency make a finding of significance when a Project may
cause a significant adverse effect on human beings. PRC § 21083(b)(3); CEQA
Guidelines § 15065(a)(4).
Public health risks related to construction work requires a mandatory finding of
significance under CEQA. Construction work has been defined as a Lower to High-
risk activity for COVID-19 spread by the Occupations Safety and Health
Administration. Recently, several construction sites have been identified as sources of
community spread of COVID-19.9
SWRCC recommends that the Lead Agency adopt additional CEQA mitigation
measures to mitigate public health risks from the Project’s construction activities.
SWRCC requests that the Lead Agency require safe on-site construction work
practices as well as training and certification for any construction workers on the
Project Site.
In particular, based upon SWRCC’s experience with safe construction site work
practices, SWRCC recommends that the Lead Agency require that while construction
activities are being conducted at the Project Site:
Construction Site Design:
• The Project Site will be limited to two controlled entry
points.
• Entry points will have temperature screening technicians
taking temperature readings when the entry point is open.
• The Temperature Screening Site Plan shows details
regarding access to the Project Site and Project Site logistics
for conducting temperature screening.
• A 48-hour advance notice will be provided to all trades prior
to the first day of temperature screening.
9 Santa Clara County Public Health (June 12, 2020) COVID-19 CASES AT CONSTRUCTION SITES HIGHLIGHT
NEED FOR CONTINUED VIGILANCE IN SECTORS THAT HAVE REOPENED, available at
https://www.sccgov.org/sites/covid19/Pages/press-release-06-12-2020-cases-at-construction-sites.aspx.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 9 of 33
• The perimeter fence directly adjacent to the entry points will
be clearly marked indicating the appropriate 6-foot social
distancing position for when you approach the screening
area. Please reference the Apex temperature screening site
map for additional details.
• There will be clear signage posted at the project site directing
you through temperature screening.
• Provide hand washing stations throughout the construction
site.
Testing Procedures:
• The temperature screening being used are non-contact
devices.
• Temperature readings will not be recorded.
• Personnel will be screened upon entering the testing center
and should only take 1-2 seconds per individual.
• Hard hats, head coverings, sweat, dirt, sunscreen or any
other cosmetics must be removed on the forehead before
temperature screening.
• Anyone who refuses to submit to a temperature screening or
does not answer the health screening questions will be
refused access to the Project Site.
• Screening will be performed at both entrances from 5:30 am
to 7:30 am.; main gate [ZONE 1] and personnel gate
[ZONE 2]
• After 7:30 am only the main gate entrance [ZONE 1] will
continue to be used for temperature testing for anybody
gaining entry to the project site such as returning personnel,
deliveries, and visitors.
• If the digital thermometer displays a temperature reading
above 100.0 degrees Fahrenheit, a second reading will be
taken to verify an accurate reading.
• If the second reading confirms an elevated temperature,
DHS will instruct the individual that he/she will not be
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 10 of 33
allowed to enter the Project Site. DHS will also instruct the
individual to promptly notify his/her supervisor and his/her
human resources (HR) representative and provide them with
a copy of Annex A.
Planning
• Require the development of an Infectious Disease Preparedness
and Response Plan that will include basic infection prevention
measures (requiring the use of personal protection equipment),
policies and procedures for prompt identification and isolation of
sick individuals, social distancing (prohibiting gatherings of no
more than 10 people including all-hands meetings and all-hands
lunches) communication and training and workplace controls that
meet standards that may be promulgated by the Center for
Disease Control, Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
Cal/OSHA, California Department of Public Health or applicable
local public health agencies.10
The United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Carpenters International Training Fund
has developed COVID-19 Training and Certification to ensure that Carpenter union
members and apprentices conduct safe work practices. The Agency should require
that all construction workers undergo COVID-19 Training and Certification before
being allowed to conduct construction activities at the Project Site.
D. The DEIR’s Project Objectives are Unduly Narrow and Circumscribe
Appropriate Project Alternatives
A project description must state the objectives sought by the proposed project. The
statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project, and it
should be clearly written to guide the selection of mitigation measures and alternatives
to be evaluated in the EIR. (CEQA Guidelines § 15124(b).) An EIR's description of
the underlying purpose of the project is the touchstone for its identification of
specific project objectives, and the statement of project objectives can help to define
10 See also The Center for Construction Research and Training, North America’s Building Trades Unions (April 27 2020)
NABTU and CPWR COVIC-19 Standards for U.S Constructions Sites, available at https://www.cpwr.com/sites/
default/files/NABTU CPWR Standards COVID-19.pdf; Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (2020)
Guidelines for Construction Sites During COVID-19 Pandemic, available at https://dpw.lacounty.gov/building-and-
safety/docs/pw guidelines-construction-sites.pdf.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 11 of 33
the contours of the project's purpose. (Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San
Bernardino (2016) 247 Cal. App. 4th 326, 347.)
While a lead agency has discretion to formulate the project objectives, they cannot be
so narrowly defined that they preclude discussion of project alternatives that could
still achieve the underlying purpose of the project. (North Coast Rivers Alliance v.
Kawamura (2015) 243 Cal. App. 4th 647, 668.) This is so because project alternatives
that do not achieve the project’s underlying purpose need not be considered. (In re
Bay-Delta Programmatic Envt'l Impact Report Coordinated Proceedings (2008) 43 Cal. 4th
1143, 1166.) And the statement of objectives should be based upon the underlying
purpose of the project—not the nature of the project itself. (Habitat & Watershed
Caretakers v. City of Santa Cruz (2013) 213 Cal. App. 4th 1277, 1299.)
Here, the DEIR inappropriately narrows the objectives of the project based upon the
nature of the project, and not on any underlying purpose. The Project’s objectives
include the “[development of] a high-quality private wave basin (The Wave) that
provides unique recreational opportunities for future residents of the project, and that
attracts resort guests and creates a landmark facility that will enhance the City’s
reputation as the ‘Gem of the Desert.’” (DEIR, 3-8.) If this remains a project
objective, the DEIR need not consider project alternatives that do not provide “high-
quality private wave basins.” Certainly, there is no specific requirement that the
tourism or residential housing needs of the City or region demand a surf simulation
facility. The Objective should be reformulated so that a meaningful analysis of project
alternatives can be considered.
E. The DEIR Fails to Support Its Findings with Substantial Evidence
When new information is brought to light showing that an impact previously
discussed in the DEIR but found to be insignificant with or without mitigation in the
DEIR’s analysis has the potential for a significant environmental impact supported by
substantial evidence, the EIR must consider and resolve the conflict in the evidence.
See Visalia Retail, L.P. v. City of Visalia (2018) 20 Cal. App. 5th 1, 13, 17; see also Protect
the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal. App. 4th 1099,
1109. While a lead agency has discretion to formulate standards for determining
significance and the need for mitigation measures—the choice of any standards or
thresholds of significance must be “based to the extent possible on scientific and
factual data and an exercise of reasoned judgment based on substantial evidence.
CEQA Guidelines § 15064(b); Cleveland Nat'l Forest Found. v. San Diego Ass'n of Gov'ts
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 12 of 33
(2017) 3 Cal. App. 5th 497, 515; Mission Bay Alliance v. Office of Community Inv. &
Infrastructure (2016) 6 Cal. App. 5th 160, 206. And when there is evidence that an
impact could be significant, an EIR cannot adopt a contrary finding without providing
an adequate explanation along with supporting evidence. East Sacramento Partnership for
a Livable City v. City of Sacramento (2016) 5 Cal. App. 5th 281, 302.
In addition, a determination that regulatory compliance will be sufficient to prevent
significant adverse impacts must be based on a project-specific analysis of potential
impacts and the effect of regulatory compliance. Californians for Alternatives to Toxics v.
Department of Food & Agric. (2005) 136 Cal. App. 4th 1; see also Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch
v Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (2008) 43 Cal. App. 4th 936, 956 (fact that
Department of Pesticide Regulation had assessed environmental effects of certain
herbicides in general did not excuse failure to assess effects of their use for specific
timber harvesting project).
1. The DEIR Fails to Support its Findings on Greenhouse Gas and Air
Quality Impacts with Substantial Evidence.
CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4 allow a lead agency to determine the significance of a
project’s GHG impact via a qualitative analysis (e.g., extent to which a project
complies with regulations or requirements of state/regional/local GHG plans),
and/or a quantitative analysis (e.g., using model or methodology to estimate project
emissions and compare it to a numeric threshold). So too, CEQA Guidelines allow
lead agencies to select what model or methodology to estimate GHG emissions so
long as the selection is supported with substantial evidence, and the lead agency
“should explain the limitations of the particular model or methodology selected for
use.” CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4(c).
CEQA Guidelines sections 15064.4(b)(3) and 15183.5(b) allow a lead agency to
consider a project’s consistency with regulations or requirements adopted to
implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG
emissions.
CEQA Guidelines §§ 15064.4(b)(3) and 15183.5(b)(1) make clear qualified GHG
reduction plans or CAPs should include the following features:
(1) Inventory: Quantify GHG emissions, both existing and
projected over a specified time period, resulting from activities (e.g.,
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 13 of 33
projects) within a defined geographic area (e.g., lead agency
jurisdiction);
(2) Establish GHG Reduction Goal: Establish a level, based
on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to GHG
emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be
cumulatively considerable;
(3) Analyze Project Types: Identify and analyze the GHG
emissions resulting from specific actions or categories of actions
anticipated within the geographic area;
(4) Craft Performance Based Mitigation Measures: Specify
measures or a group of measures, including performance standards,
that substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project-
by-project basis, would collectively achieve the specified emissions
level;
(5) Monitoring: Establish a mechanism to monitor the CAP
progress toward achieving said level and to require amendment if
the plan is not achieving specified levels;
Collectively, the above-listed CAP features tie qualitative measures to quantitative
results, which in turn become binding via proper monitoring and enforcement by the
jurisdiction—all resulting in real GHG reductions for the jurisdiction as a whole, and
the substantial evidence that the incremental contribution of an individual project is
not cumulatively considerable.
Here, the DEIR’s analysis of GHG impacts is unsupported by substantial evidence, as
it relies on outdated modeling. The DEIR’s analysis of air quality and GHG impacts
throughout the DEIR relies on data created using CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. (See,
e.g., DEIR, 4.1-13). A newer version of this software (currently CalEEMod version
2020.4.0) became available prior to the release of the DEIR. The DEIR provides no
discussion or justification for use of the outdated 2016 version of the software. The
use of outdated modeling software may result in underestimation of the Project’s
GHG emissions, calling the DEIR’s conclusions into question.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 14 of 33
The DEIR’s reliance on inaccurate modeling also affects its analysis of air quality
impacts and energy impacts. The DEIR potentially vastly undercounts the Project’s air
pollutant emissions.
Moreover, in its discussion of the GHG impact Significance Threshold chosen for its
GHG analysis, the DEIR chooses to use a target of 3.65 MTCO2e/yr per service
population, stating that this screening target was chosen as a linear interpolation
between the 2020 and 2030 2017 Scoping Plan reduction/efficiency targets based on
the projected 2026 buildout of the Project. (DEIR, 4.7-10). However, the DEIR fails
to provide any reasoning for this choice in either the DEIR itself or the Appendix I
Greenhouse Gas Report. Given that the 2017 Scoping Plan has a target of 2.88
MTCO2e/yr to be attained by 2030,11 it is unclear how a proration of GHG emissions
targets between 2020 and 2030 would be consistent with meeting the goals of AB 32
and SB 32.
2. The DEIR is Required to Consider and Adopt All Feasible Air Quality
and GHG Mitigation Measures
A fundamental purpose of an EIR is to identify ways in which a proposed project's
significant environmental impacts can be mitigated or avoided. Pub. Res. Code §§
21002.1(a), 21061. To implement this statutory purpose, an EIR must describe any
feasible mitigation measures that can minimize the project's significant environmental
effects. PRC §§ 21002.1(a), 21100(b)(3); CEQA Guidelines §§ 15121(a), 15126.4(a).
If the project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the
project only upon finding that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened all significant
effects on the environment where feasible”12 and find that ‘specific overriding
economic, legal, social, technology or other benefits of the project outweigh the
significant effects on the environment.”13 “A gloomy forecast of environmental
degradation is of little or no value without pragmatic, concrete means to minimize the
impacts and restore ecological equilibrium.” Environmental Council of Sacramento v. City of
Sacramento (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1018, 1039.
Here, the DEIR finds that the Project will have significant and unavoidable impacts on
air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, yet proposes mitigation measures that fall
11 Representing an emissions deduction of 40% from 1990 levels.
12 PRC §§ 21002; 21002.1, 21081; CEQA Guidelines §§ 15091, 15092(b)(2)(A).
13 PRC §§ 21002; 21002.1, 21081; CEQA Guidelines §§ 15091, 15092(b)(2)(B).
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 15 of 33
short of the “all feasible mitigation measures” standard set by CEQA. Mitigation
Measure AQ-2 requires future developments to employ U.S. EPA Tier 3 construction
equipment. However, it fails to justify with substantial evidence why U.S. EPA Tier 4
Final-compliant should not be required. Further, Mitigation Measure AQ-3 demands
the use of low-VOC architectural coatings within the Project area, but the DEIR does
not contemplate the feasibility of a requirement that “Super-Complaint” architectural
be utilized to further decrease Air Quality impacts.
Additionally, the DEIR notes that the Project will require the “design [of] building
shells and building components… to meet 2019 Title 24 Standards,” (DEIR, 4.1-14),
but does not specify which standards it is specifically referring to—energy efficiency
standards or CalGreen building standards. Though the DEIR states that both should
apply, it does not state the Project’s level of compliance with Tile 24 standards. The
Title 24 “CalGreen” building standards include two different standard “tiers” (Tier 1
and Tier 2) for both residential and non-residential buildings. (Cal. Code of
Regulations, Title 24, Part 11, Appendix A4 at A4.601 and Appendix A5 at A5.601).
The DEIR does not address which tier is applicable within the Project’s specific plan
area, and does not state that that the more stringent Tier 2 standards for residential and
non-residential development should be followed. The City should reevaluate the
mitigation measures proposed in the DEIR to ensure the adoption of all feasible
mitigation measures as required by CEQA.
3. The DEIR Improperly Labels Mitigation Measures as “Project Design
Features”
The DEIR improperly labels mitigation measures for “Project Design Features” or
“PDFs” which the DEIR purports will reduce environmental impacts. (See, e.g., DEIR,
4.1-13 through 4.1-15 (Air Quality); see also DEIR, 4.5-18 through 4.5-19 (Energy);
DEIR, 4.7-11 through 13 (Greenhouse Gas Emissions).) Many of the DEIR’s
conclusions regarding mitigation of environmental impacts below levels of significance
rely on the implementation of these PDFs, and that as such no additional mitigation is
required.
However, it is established that “’[a]voidance, minimization and / or mitigation
measure’ . . . are not ‘part of the project.’ . . . compressing the analysis of impacts and
mitigation measures into a single issue . . disregards the requirements of CEQA.”
(Lotus v. Department of Transportation (2014) 223 Cal. App. 4th 645, 656.)
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 16 of 33
When “an agency decides to incorporate mitigation measures into its significance
determination, and relies on those mitigation measures to determine that no
significant effects will occur, that agency must treat those measures as though there
were adopted following a finding of significance.” (Lotus, supra, 223 Cal. App. 4th at
652 [citing CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1) and Cal. Public Resources Code §
21081(a)(1).])
By labeling mitigation measures as project design features, the City violates CEQA by
failing to disclose “the analytic route that the agency took from the evidence to its
findings.” (Cal. Public Resources Code § 21081.5; CEQA Guidelines § 15093; Village
Laguna of Laguna Beach, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1982) 134 Cal. App. 3d 1022, 1035
[quoting Topanga Assn for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal. 3d
506, 515.])
The DEIR’s use of “Project Design Features” further violates CEQA because such
measures would not be included in the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program CEQA requires lead agencies to adopt mitigation measures that are fully
enforceable and to adopt a monitoring and/or reporting program to ensure that the
measures are implemented to reduce the Project’s significant environmental effects to
the extent feasible. (PRC § 21081.6; CEQA Guidelines § 15091(d).) Though they are
presumably enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of the Project’s
Development Agreement, the PDFs should be properly adopted as mitigations and
subject to a mitigation monitoring and reporting program under CEQA.
4. The DEIR Fails to Support Its Findings on Population and Housing and
Recreation with Substantial Evidence
The City’s Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) concluded that the Project will have a less
than significant impact on population and housing, and thus precluded the DEIR from
undertaking any further analysis of the direct or indirect effects of the Project on
population growth in the City. Thus, the DEIR does not analyze the issue. Analysis of
Population and Housing impacts was ruled out by NOP, on the grounds that projected
population growth related to the Project still puts the City under its 2035 population
forecast. (DEIR, Appendix A, NOP at pp. 39-40.) La Quinta’s General Plan
Environmental Impact Report forecasts a population of 46,297 people by 2035 (Id.),
whereas predicted growth related to the project is 1,698 new residents, (DEIR, 6-6),
raising the population to 42,358 (2,181 new residents in the NOP (raising the
population to 42,841)). However, SCAG’s comment on the City’s NOP forecasts a
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 17 of 33
lower population of 45,034 by 2035. (DEIR, Appendix A, Letter from Southern
California Association of Governments to Nicole Sauviat Criste (April 1, 2021) at p. 4.)
The Project will ultimately result in a net increase in housing, and may have
cumulatively considerable impacts with other housing projects in the area, especially
the adjacent Andalusia project. An EIR’s discussion of cumulative impacts is required
by CEQA Guidelines §15130(a). The determination of whether there are cumulative
impacts in any issue area should be determined based on an assessment of the project's
incremental effects “viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects
of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.” (CEQA
Guidelines §15065(a)(3); Banning Ranch Conservancy v City of Newport Beach (2012) 211
Cal. App. 4th 1209, 1228; see also CEQA Guidelines §15355(b).)
The DEIR demurs on any cumulative impacts analysis based on the assumption that
the Project “is not anticipated to result in an indirect growth inducing impact vecause
the existing infrastructure has been sized to accommodate long term growth… and
because the projected population growth is already included in the City of La Quinta’s
General Plan.” (DEIR, 6-7). The DEIR cannot simply ignore the fact that 1,698 new
residents will potentially be drawn to the City by the Project and not consider the
cumulative effect of that projected population growth with that of other pending
projects. This is a potentially significant impact that the DEIR should analyze.
In addition, neither the DEIR nor the NOP contain any substantive discussion of
Recreation impacts. (See NOP at pp. 41-42; DEIR, 6-7 through 6-8). The CEQA
Guidelines identify a threshold of significance related to whether or not a project will
include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. The Project
dedicates 23.6 acres of previously-open space to the development of recreational
facilities on in the Project area, including the potential development of rope courses.
This has reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts and requires analysis in the
DEIR. Payment of Quimby fees (a mitigation) does not excuse the DEIR from
analysis of environmental impacts the Project will have via the creation of recreational
spaces.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 18 of 33
F. The DEIR Fails to Demonstrate Consistency with SCAG’s RTP/SCS
Plans
Senate Bill No. 375 requires regional planning agencies to include a sustainable
communities strategy in their regional transportation plans. Gov. Code § 65080,
sub.(b)(2)(B).) CEQA Guidelines § 15125(d) provides that an EIR “shall discuss any
inconsistencies between the proposed project and…regional plans. Such regional plans
include…regional transportation plans.” Thus, CEQA requires analysis of any
inconsistencies between the Project and the relevant RTP/SCS plan.
In April 2012, SCAG adopted its 2012-2035 RTP/ SCS (“2012 RTP/SCS”), which
proposed specific land use policies and transportation strategies for local governments
to implement that will help the region achieve GHG emission reductions of 9 percent
per capita in 2020 and 16 percent per capita in 2035.
In April 2016, SCAG adopted the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS (“2016 RTP/SCS”)14, which
incorporates and builds upon the policies and strategies in the 2012 RTP/SCS 15, that
will help the region achieve GHG emission reductions that would reduce the region’s
per capita transportation emissions by eight percent by 2020 and 18 percent by 2035.16
SCAG’s RTP/SCS plan is based upon the same requirements outlined in CARB’s 2017
Scoping Plan and SB 375.
On September 3, 2020, SCAG adopted the 2020 – 2045 RTP / SCS titled Connect
SoCal (“2020 RTP/ SCS”).17 The 2020 RTP / SCS adopts policies and strategies aimed
at reducing the region’s per capita greenhouse gas emissions by 8% below 2005 per
capita emissions levels by 2020 and 19% below 2005 per capita emissions levels by
2035. 18
For both the 2012 and 2016 RTP/SCS, SCAG prepared Program Environmental
Impact Reports (“PEIR”) that include Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs
(“MMRP”) that list project-level environmental mitigation measures that directly
and/or indirectly relate to a project’s GHG impacts and contribution to the region’s
15 SCAG (Apr. 2016) 2016 RTP/SCS, p. 69, 75-115 (attached as Exhibit D).
16 Id., p. 8, 15, 153, 166.
17 SCAG (Sept 2020) Connect Socal: The 2020 – 2045 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable
Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments, available at
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal-plan 0.pdf?1606001176
18 Id. At xiii.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 19 of 33
GHG emissions.19 These environmental mitigation measures serve to help local
municipalities when identifying mitigation to reduce impacts on a project-specific basis
that can and should be implemented when they identify and mitigate project-specific
environmental impacts.20
Here, the DEIR fails to analyze the Project’s is consistency with any of SCAG’s
aforementioned RTP/SCS Plans. The DEIR must demonstrate that the Project is
consistent with the RTP/SCS Plans’ project-level goals, including:
Land Use and Transportation
• Providing transit fare discounts 21;
• Implementing transit integration strategies 22; and
• Anticipating shared mobility platforms, car-to-car communications, and
automated vehicle technologies.23
GHG Emissions Goals 24
• Reduction in emissions resulting from a project through implementation of
project features, project design, or other measures, such as those described in
Appendix F of the State CEQA Guidelines,25 such as:
o Potential measures to reduce wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary
consumption of energy during construction, operation, maintenance
and/or removal. The discussion should explain why certain measures
were incorporated in the project and why other measures were dismissed.
19 Id., p. 116-124; see also SCAG (April 2012) Regional Transportation Plan 2012 – 20135, fn. 38, p. 77-86
(attached as Exhibit E).
20 SCAG 2012 RTP/SCS (attached as Exhibit E), p. 77; see also SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS, fn. 41, p. 115.
21 SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS, pp. 75-114
22 Id.
23 Id.
24 SCAG 2012 RTP/SCS (Mar. 2012) Final PEIR MMRP, p. 6-2—6-14 (including mitigation measures (“MM”)
AQ3, BIO/OS3, CUL2, GEO3, GHG15, HM3, LU14, NO1, POP4, PS12, TR23, W9 [stating “[l]ocal
agencies can and should comply with the requirements of CEQA to mitigate impacts to [the environmental]
as applicable and feasible …[and] may refer to Appendix G of this PEIR for examples of potential mitigation
to consider when appropriate in reducing environmental impacts of future projects.” (Emphasis added)]),; see
also id., Final PEIR Appendix G (including MMs AQ1-23, GHG1-8, PS1-104, TR1-83, W1-62),; SCAG 2016
RTP/SCS (Mar. 2016) Final PEIR MMRP, p. 11–63 (including MMs AIR-2(b), AIR-4(b), EN- 2(b), GHG-
3(b), HYD-1(b), HYD-2(b), HYD-8(b), TRA-1(b), TRA-2(b), USS-4(b), USS-6(b)).
25 CEQA Guidelines, Appendix F-Energy Conservation, http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/
guidelines/Appendix_F.html.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 20 of 33
o The potential siting, orientation, and design to minimize energy
consumption, including transportation energy.
o The potential for reducing peak energy demand.
o Alternate fuels (particularly renewable ones) or energy systems.
o Energy conservation which could result from recycling efforts.
• Off-site measures to mitigate a project’s emissions.
• Measures that consider incorporation of Best Available Control Technology
(BACT) during design, construction and operation of projects to minimize
GHG emissions, including but not limited to:
o Use energy and fuel-efficient vehicles and equipment;
o Deployment of zero- and/or near zero emission technologies;
o Use cement blended with the maximum feasible amount of flash or other
materials that reduce GHG emissions from cement production;
o Incorporate design measures to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste
management through encouraging solid waste recycling and reuse;
o Incorporate design measures to reduce energy consumption and increase
use of renewable energy;
o Incorporate design measures to reduce water consumption;
o Use lighter-colored pavement where feasible;
o Recycle construction debris to maximum extent feasible;
• Adopting employer trip reduction measures to reduce employee trips such as
vanpool and carpool programs, providing end-of-trip facilities, and
telecommuting programs.
• Designate a percentage of parking spaces for ride-sharing vehicles or high-
occupancy vehicles, and provide adequate passenger loading and unloading for
those vehicles;
• Land use siting and design measures that reduce GHG emissions, including:
o Measures that increase vehicle efficiency, encourage use of zero and low
emissions vehicles, or reduce the carbon content of fuels, including
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 21 of 33
constructing or encouraging construction of electric vehicle charging
stations or neighborhood electric vehicle networks, or charging for
electric bicycles; and
o Measures to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste management
through encouraging solid waste recycling and reuse.
Hydrology & Water Quality Goals
• Incorporate measures consistent in a manner that conforms to the standards set
by regulatory agencies responsible for regulating water quality/supply
requirements, such as:
o Reduce exterior consumptive uses of water in public areas, and should
promote reductions in private homes and businesses, by shifting to
drought-tolerant native landscape plantings(xeriscaping), using weather-
based irrigation systems, educating other public agencies about water use,
and installing related water pricing incentives.
o Promote the availability of drought-resistant landscaping options and
provide information on where these can be purchased. Use of reclaimed
water especially in median landscaping and hillside landscaping can and
should be implemented where feasible.
o Implement water conservation best practices such as low-flow toilets,
water-efficient clothes washers, water system audits, and leak detection
and repair.
o Ensure that projects requiring continual dewatering facilities implement
monitoring systems and long-term administrative procedures to ensure
proper water management that prevents degrading of surface water and
minimizes, to the greatest extent possible, adverse impacts on
groundwater for the life of the project. Comply with appropriate building
codes and standard practices including the Uniform Building Code.
o Maximize, where practical and feasible, permeable surface area in existing
urbanized areas to protect water quality, reduce flooding, allow for
groundwater recharge, and preserve wildlife habitat. Minimized new
impervious surfaces to the greatest extent possible, including the use of
in-lieu fees and off-site mitigation.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 22 of 33
o Avoid designs that require continual dewatering where feasible.
o Where feasible, do not site transportation facilities in groundwater
recharge areas, to prevent conversion of those areas to impervious
surface.
• Incorporate measures consistent in a manner that conforms to the standards set
by regulatory agencies responsible for regulating and enforcing water quality and
waste discharge requirements, such as:
o Complete, and have approved, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(“SWPPP”) before initiation of construction.
o Implement Best Management Practices to reduce the peak stormwater
runoff from the project site to the maximum extent practicable.
o Comply with the Caltrans stormwater discharge permit as applicable; and
identify and implement Best Management Practices to manage site
erosion, wash water runoff, and spill control.
o Complete, and have approved, a Standard Urban Stormwater
Management Plan, prior to occupancy of residential or commercial
structures.
o Ensure adequate capacity of the surrounding stormwater system to
support stormwater runoff from new or rehabilitated structures or
buildings.
o Prior to construction within an area subject to Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act, obtain all required permit approvals and certifications for
construction within the vicinity of a watercourse (e.g., Army Corps § 404
permit, Regional Waterboard § 401 permit, Fish & Wildlife § 401 permit).
o Where feasible, restore or expand riparian areas such that there is no net
loss of impervious surface as a result of the project.
o Install structural water quality control features, such as drainage channels,
detention basins, oil and grease traps, filter systems, and vegetated buffers
to prevent pollution of adjacent water resources by polluted runoff where
required by applicable urban stormwater runoff discharge permits, on
new facilities.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 23 of 33
o Provide structural stormwater runoff treatment consistent with the
applicable urban stormwater runoff permit where Caltrans is the
operator, the statewide permit applies.
o Provide operational best management practices for street cleaning, litter
control, and catch basin cleaning are implemented to prevent water
quality degradation in compliance with applicable stormwater runoff
discharge permits; and ensure treatment controls are in place as early as
possible, such as during the acquisition process for rights-of-way, not just
later during the facilities design and construction phase.
o Comply with applicable municipal separate storm sewer system discharge
permits as well as Caltrans’ stormwater discharge permit including long-
term sediment control and drainage of roadway runoff.
o Incorporate as appropriate treatment and control features such as
detention basins, infiltration strips, and porous paving, other features to
control surface runoff and facilitate groundwater recharge into the design
of new transportation projects early on in the process to ensure that
adequate acreage and elevation contours are provided during the right-of-
way acquisition process.
o Design projects to maintain volume of runoff, where any downstream
receiving water body has not been designed and maintained to
accommodate the increase in flow velocity, rate, and volume without
impacting the water's beneficial uses. Pre-project flow velocities, rates,
volumes must not be exceeded. This applies not only to increases in
stormwater runoff from the project site, but also to hydrologic changes
induced by flood plain encroachment. Projects should not cause or
contribute to conditions that degrade the physical integrity or ecological
function of any downstream receiving waters.
o Provide culverts and facilities that do not increase the flow velocity, rate,
or volume and/or acquiring sufficient storm drain easements that
accommodate an appropriately vegetated earthen drainage channel.
o Upgrade stormwater drainage facilities to accommodate any increased
runoff volumes. These upgrades may include the construction of
detention basins or structures that will delay peak flows and reduce flow
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 24 of 33
velocities, including expansion and restoration of wetlands and riparian
buffer areas. System designs shall be completed to eliminate increases in
peak flow rates from current levels.
o Encourage Low Impact Development (“LID”) and incorporation of
natural spaces that reduce, treat, infiltrate and manage stormwater runoff
flows in all new developments, where practical and feasible.
• Incorporate measures consistent with the provisions of the Groundwater
Management Act and implementing regulations, such as:
o For projects requiring continual dewatering facilities, implement
monitoring systems and long-term administrative procedures to ensure
proper water management that prevents degrading of surface water and
minimizes, to the greatest extent possible, adverse impacts on
groundwater for the life of the project, Construction designs shall comply
with appropriate building codes and standard practices including the
Uniform Building Code.
o Maximize, where practical and feasible, permeable surface area in existing
urbanized areas to protect water quality, reduce flooding, allow for
groundwater recharge, and preserve wildlife habitat. Minimize to the
greatest extent possible, new impervious surfaces, including the use of in-
lieu fees and off-site mitigation.
o Avoid designs that require continual dewatering where feasible.
o Avoid construction and siting on groundwater recharge areas, to prevent
conversion of those areas to impervious surface.
o Reduce hardscape to the extent feasible to facilitate groundwater recharge
as appropriate.
• Incorporate mitigation measures to ensure compliance with all federal, state, and
local floodplain regulations, consistent with the provisions of the National
Flood Insurance Program, such as:
o Comply with Executive Order 11988 on Floodplain Management, which
requires avoidance of incompatible floodplain development, restoration
and preservation of the natural and beneficial floodplain values, and
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 25 of 33
maintenance of consistency with the standards and criteria of the
National Flood Insurance Program.
o Ensure that all roadbeds for new highway and rail facilities be elevated at
least one foot above the 100-year base flood elevation. Since alluvial fan
flooding is not often identified on FEMA flood maps, the risk of alluvial
fan flooding should be evaluated and projects should be sited to avoid
alluvial fan flooding. Delineation of floodplains and alluvial fan
boundaries should attempt to account for future hydrologic changes
caused by global climate change.
Transportation, Traffic, and Safety
• Institute teleconferencing, telecommute and/or flexible work hour programs to
reduce unnecessary employee transportation.
• Create a ride-sharing program by designating a certain percentage of parking
spaces for ride sharing vehicles, designating adequate passenger loading and
unloading for ride sharing vehicles, and providing a web site or message board
for coordinating rides.
• Provide a vanpool for employees.
• Provide a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan containing
strategies to reduce on-site parking demand and single occupancy vehicle travel.
The TDM shall include strategies to increase bicycle, pedestrian, transit, and
carpools/vanpool use, including:
o Inclusion of additional bicycle parking, shower, and locker facilities that
exceed the requirement.
o Direct transit sales or subsidized transit passes.
o Guaranteed ride home program.
o Pre-tax commuter benefits (checks).
o On-site car-sharing program (such as City Car Share, Zip Car, etc.).
o On-site carpooling program.
o Distribution of information concerning alternative transportation
options.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 26 of 33
o Parking spaces sold/leased separately.
o Parking management strategies; including attendant/valet parking and
shared parking spaces.
• Promote ride sharing programs e.g., by designating a certain percentage of
parking spaces for high-occupancy vehicles, providing larger parking spaces to
accommodate vans used for ride-sharing, and designating adequate passenger
loading and unloading and waiting areas.
• Encourage the use of public transit systems by enhancing safety and cleanliness
on vehicles and in and around stations, providing shuttle service to public
transit, offering public transit incentives and providing public education and
publicity about public transportation services.
• Build or fund a major transit stop within or near transit development upon
consultation with applicable CTCs.
• Work with the school districts to improve pedestrian and bike access to schools
and to restore or expand school bus service using lower-emitting vehicles.
• Purchase, or create incentives for purchasing, low or zero-emission vehicles.
• Provide the necessary facilities and infrastructure to encourage the use of low or
zero-emission vehicles.
• Promote ride sharing programs, if determined feasible and applicable by the
Lead Agency, including:
o Designate a certain percentage of parking spaces for ride-sharing vehicles.
o Designate adequate passenger loading, unloading, and waiting areas for
ride-sharing vehicles.
o Provide a web site or message board for coordinating shared rides.
o Encourage private, for-profit community car-sharing, including parking
spaces for car share vehicles at convenient locations accessible by public
transit.
o Hire or designate a rideshare coordinator to develop and implement
ridesharing programs.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 27 of 33
• Support voluntary, employer-based trip reduction programs, if determined
feasible and applicable by the Lead Agency, including:
o Provide assistance to regional and local ridesharing organizations.
o Advocate for legislation to maintain and expand incentives for employer
ridesharing programs.
o Require the development of Transportation Management Associations
for large employers and commercial/ industrial complexes.
o Provide public recognition of effective programs through awards, top ten
lists, and other mechanisms.
• Implement a “guaranteed ride home” program for those who commute by
public transit, ridesharing, or other modes of transportation, and encourage
employers to subscribe to or support the program.
• Encourage and utilize shuttles to serve neighborhoods, employment centers and
major destinations.
• Create a free or low-cost local area shuttle system that includes a fixed route to
popular tourist destinations or shopping and business centers.
• Work with existing shuttle service providers to coordinate their services.
• Facilitate employment opportunities that minimize the need for private vehicle
trips, such as encourage telecommuting options with new and existing
employers, through project review and incentives, as appropriate.
• Organize events and workshops to promote GHG-reducing activities.
• Implement a Parking Management Program to discourage private vehicle use,
including:
o Encouraging carpools and vanpools with preferential parking and a
reduced parking fee.
o Institute a parking cash-out program or establish a parking fee for all
single-occupant vehicles.
Utilities & Service Systems
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 28 of 33
• Integrate green building measures consistent with CALGreen (Title 24, part 11),
U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design,
energy Star Homes, Green Point Rated Homes, and the California Green
Builder Program into project design including, but not limited to the following:
o Reuse and minimization of construction and demolition (C&D) debris
and diversion of C&D waste from landfills to recycling facilities.
o Inclusion of a waste management plan that promotes maximum C&D
diversion.
o Development of indoor recycling program and space.
o Discourage exporting of locally generated waste outside of the SCAG
region during the construction and implementation of a project.
Encourage disposal within the county where the waste originates as much
as possible. Promote green technologies for long-distance transport of
waste (e.g., clean engines and clean locomotives or electric rail for waste-
by-rail disposal systems) and consistency with SCAQMD and 2016
RTP/SCS policies can and should be required.
o Develop ordinances that promote waste prevention and recycling
activities such as: requiring waste prevention and recycling efforts at all
large events and venues; implementing recycled content procurement
programs; and developing opportunities to divert food waste away from
landfills and toward food banks and composting facilities.
o Develop alternative waste management strategies such as composting,
recycling, and conversion technologies.
o Develop and site composting, recycling, and conversion technology
facilities that have minimum environmental and health impacts.
o Require the reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste
(including, but not limited to, soil, vegetation, concrete, lumber, metal,
and cardboard).
o Integrate reuse and recycling into residential industrial, institutional and
commercial projects.
o Provide recycling opportunities for residents, the public, and tenant
businesses.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 29 of 33
o Provide education and publicity about reducing waste and available
recycling services.
o Implement or expand city or county-wide recycling and composting
programs for residents and businesses. This could include extending the
types of recycling services offered (e.g., to include food and green waste
recycling) and providing public education and publicity about recycling
services.
The DEIR fails to mention or demonstrate consistency with the above listed measures
and strategies of the SCAG RTP/SCS Plans. The DEIR should be revised to indicate
what specific project-level mitigation measures that will be followed to demonstrate
consistency with the RTP/SCS Plans.
G. Failure to Include Consultation and Preparation Section
CEQA requires all EIRs contain certain contents. See CEQA Guidelines §§ 15122 –
15131. CEQA expressly requires an EIR “identify all federal, state, or local agencies,
other organizations, and private individuals consulted in preparing the draft EIR, and
the persons, firm, or agency preparing the draft EIR, by contract or other
authorization.” CEQA Guidelines § 15129. This information is critical to
demonstrating a lead agency fulfilled its obligation to “consult with, and obtain
comments from, each responsible agency, trustee agency, any public agency that has
jurisdiction by law with respect to the project, and any city or county that borders on
a city or county within which the project is located ….” PRC § 21104(a).
Failure to provide sufficient information concerning the lead agency’s consultation
efforts could undermine the legal sufficiency of an EIR. Courts determine de novo
whether a CEQA environmental document sufficiently discloses information required
by CEQA as “noncompliance with the information disclosure provisions” of CEQA
is a failure to proceed in a manner required by law. PRC § 21005(a); see also Sierra Club
v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal. 5th 502, 515.
Here, the DEIR fails to identify which federal agencies, state agencies, local agencies,
or other organizations, if any, that were consulted in the preparation of this DEIR.
The DEIR should be revised to identify the organizations the City consulted with in
the preparation of the DEIR in compliance with Section 21104(a) of the Public
Resources Code.
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 30 of 33
II. THE PROJECT VIOLATES THE STATE PLANNING AND
ZONING LAW AS WELL AS THE CITY’S GENERAL PLAN
A. Background Regarding the State Planning and Zoning Law
Each California city and county must adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan
governing development. Napa Citizens for Honest Gov. v. Napa County Bd. of Supervisors
(2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 342, 352, citing Gov. Code §§ 65030, 65300. The general plan
sits at the top of the land use planning hierarchy, and serves as a “constitution” or
“charter” for all future development. DeVita v. County of Napa (1995) 9 Cal.4th 763,
773; Lesher Communications, Inc. v. City of Walnut Creek (1990) 52 Cal.3d 531, 540.
General plan consistency is “the linchpin of California’s land use and development
laws; it is the principle which infused the concept of planned growth with the force
of law.” See Debottari v. Norco City Council (1985) 171 Cal.App.3d 1204, 1213.
State law mandates two levels of consistency. First, a general plan must be internally
or “horizontally” consistent: its elements must “comprise an integrated, internally
consistent and compatible statement of policies for the adopting agency.” See Gov.
Code § 65300.5; Sierra Club v. Bd. of Supervisors (1981) 126 Cal.App.3d 698, 704. A
general plan amendment thus may not be internally inconsistent, nor may it cause the
general plan as a whole to become internally inconsistent. See DeVita, 9 Cal.4th at 796
fn. 12.
Second, state law requires “vertical” consistency, meaning that zoning ordinances and
other land use decisions also must be consistent with the general plan. See Gov.
Code § 65860(a)(2) [land uses authorized by zoning ordinance must be “compatible
with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the
[general] plan.”]; see also Neighborhood Action Group v. County of Calaveras (1984) 156
Cal.App.3d 1176, 1184. A zoning ordinance that conflicts with the general plan or
impedes achievement of its policies is invalid and cannot be given effect. See Lesher,
52 Cal.3d at 544.
State law requires that all subordinate land use decisions, including conditional use
permits, be consistent with the general plan. See Gov. Code § 65860(a)(2);
Neighborhood Action Group, 156 Cal.App.3d at 1184.
A project cannot be found consistent with a general plan if it conflicts with a general
plan policy that is “fundamental, mandatory, and clear,” regardless of whether it is
consistent with other general plan policies. See Endangered Habitats League v. County of
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 31 of 33
Orange (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 777, 782-83; Families Unafraid to Uphold Rural El Dorado
County v. Bd. of Supervisors (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 1332, 1341-42 (“FUTURE”).
Moreover, even in the absence of such a direct conflict, an ordinance or development
project may not be approved if it interferes with or frustrates the general plan’s
policies and objectives. See Napa Citizens, 91 Cal.App.4th at 378-79; see also Lesher, 52
Cal.3d at 544 (zoning ordinance restricting development conflicted with growth-
oriented policies of general plan).
As explained in full below, the Project is inconsistent with the City’s General Plan. As
such, the Project violates the State Planning and Zoning law.
B. The Project is Inconsistent with the General Plan, and thus the DEIR’s
Conclusions Regarding Impacts on Land Use and Planning are
Unsupported by Substantial Evidence
The DEIR fail to establish the Project’s consistency with several General Plan goals,
policies, and programs including the following:
• Policy LU-2.3: The City’s outdoor lighting ordinance will be maintained;
• Goal LU-3 and associated policies and programs: Safe and identifiable
neighborhoods that provide a sense of place;
• Policy LU-5.1: Use development incentives to achieve a mix of housing,
including affordable housing;
• Policy CIR-1.14: Private streets shall be developed in accordance with
development standards set forth in the Municipal Code, relevant Public
Works Bulletins, and other applicable standards and guidelines;
• Policy SC-1.2: Reduce water consumption at a minimum consistent with
the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (also see Air Quality Element);
• Policy SC-1.4: Reduce Greenhouse Gas emissions at a minimum
consistent with the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (also see Air Quality
Element);
• Goal H-2 and associated policies and programs: Assist in the creation and
provision of resources to support housing for lower and moderate income
households;
• Goal H-3 and associated policies and programs: Create a regulatory system
that does not unduly constrain the maintenance, improvement, and
development of housing affordable to all La Quinta residents;
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 32 of 33
• Goal H-5 and associated policies and programs: Provide equal housing
opportunities for all persons;
• Goal AQ-1 and associated policies and programs: A reduction in all air
emissions generated within the City;
• Goal BIO-1 and associated policies and programs: The protection and
preservation of native and environmentally significant biological resources
and their habitats;
• Policy WR-1.6: Encourage the use of permeable pavements in residential
and commercial development projects;
• Goal OS-2 and associated policies and programs: Good stewardship of
natural open space and preservation of open space areas;
• Goal OS-3 and associated policies and programs: Preservation of scenic
resources as vital contributions to the City’s economic health and overall
quality of life;
• Policy UTL-1.3: New development shall reduce its projected water
consumption rates over “business-as-usual” consumption rates.
The Project fails to discuss its conformity with each of the aforementioned Goals,
Policies, and Programs laid out in the City’s General Plan, even though the Project will
have reasonably foreseeable impacts on land use, traffic, housing and population,
biological resources, vehicle trip generation, air quality, and GHG emissions. This
discussion is relevant not only to compliance with land use and zoning law, but also
with the contemplation of the Project’s consistency with land use plans, policies, and
regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental impacts.
The DEIR should be amended to include analysis of the Project’s comportment with
the Goals, Policies, and Programs listed above.
Further, the DEIR should be revised to analyze the Project’s consistency with the
City’s upcoming 6th Cycle Housing Element Update and its related Regional Housing
Needs Assessment.
III. CONCLUSION
Commenters request that the City revise and recirculate the Project’s DEIR and/or
prepare an environmental impact report which addresses the aforementioned
concerns. If the City has any questions or concerns, feel free to contact my Office.
Sincerely,
City of La Quinta – Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
August 5, 2021
Page 33 of 33
______________________
Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorneys for Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
Attached:
March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and
Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling (Exhibit A);
Air Quality and GHG Expert Paul Rosenfeld CV (Exhibit B);
Air Quality and GHG Expert Matt Hagemann CV (Exhibit C);
EXHIBIT A
1
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
mhagemann@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
prosenfeld@swape.com
March 8, 2021
Mitchell M. Tsai
155 South El Molino, Suite 104
Pasadena, CA 91101
Subject: Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling
Dear Mr. Tsai,
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (“SWAPE”) is pleased to provide the following draft technical report
explaining the significance of worker trips required for construction of land use development projects with
respect to the estimation of greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions. The report will also discuss the potential for
local hire requirements to reduce the length of worker trips, and consequently, reduced or mitigate the
potential GHG impacts.
Worker Trips and Greenhouse Gas Calculations
The California Emissions Estimator Model (“CalEEMod”) is a “statewide land use emissions computer model
designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental
professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with both
construction and operations from a variety of land use projects.”1 CalEEMod quantifies construction-related
emissions associated with land use projects resulting from off-road construction equipment; on-road mobile
equipment associated with workers, vendors, and hauling; fugitive dust associated with grading, demolition,
truck loading, and on-road vehicles traveling along paved and unpaved roads; and architectural coating
activities; and paving.2
The number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to calculate emissions associated
with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the Project site during construction.3
1 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home.
2 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home.
3 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/01 user-39-s-guide2016-3-2 15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34.
2
Specifically, the number and length of vehicle trips is utilized to estimate the vehicle miles travelled (“VMT”)
associated with construction. Then, utilizing vehicle-class specific EMFAC 2014 emission factors, CalEEMod
calculates the vehicle exhaust, evaporative, and dust emissions resulting from construction-related VMT,
including personal vehicles for worker commuting.4
Specifically, in order to calculate VMT, CalEEMod multiplies the average daily trip rate by the average overall trip
length (see excerpt below):
“VMTd = Σ(Average Daily Trip Rate i * Average Overall Trip Length i) n
Where:
n = Number of land uses being modeled.”5
Furthermore, to calculate the on-road emissions associated with worker trips, CalEEMod utilizes the following
equation (see excerpt below):
“Emissionspollutant = VMT * EFrunning,pollutant
Where:
Emissionspollutant = emissions from vehicle running for each pollutant
VMT = vehicle miles traveled
EFrunning,pollutant = emission factor for running emissions.”6
Thus, there is a direct relationship between trip length and VMT, as well as a direct relationship between VMT
and vehicle running emissions. In other words, when the trip length is increased, the VMT and vehicle running
emissions increase as a result. Thus, vehicle running emissions can be reduced by decreasing the average overall
trip length, by way of a local hire requirement or otherwise.
Default Worker Trip Parameters and Potential Local Hire Requirements
As previously discussed, the number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to
calculate emissions associated with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the
Project site during construction.7 In order to understand how local hire requirements and associated worker trip
length reductions impact GHG emissions calculations, it is important to consider the CalEEMod default worker
trip parameters. CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site-specific information, such as
land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project
type. If more specific project information is known, the user can change the default values and input project-
specific values, but the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requires that such changes be justified by
substantial evidence.8 The default number of construction-related worker trips is calculated by multiplying the
4 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 14-15.
5 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 23.
6 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 15.
7 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/01 user-39-s-guide2016-3-2 15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34.
8 CalEEMod User Guide, available at: http://www.caleemod.com/, p. 1, 9.
5
Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we
retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional
services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar
circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of
service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and
protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which
were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain
informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of
information obtained or provided by third parties.
Sincerely,
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
EXHIBIT B
SOIL WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, California 90405
Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
Mobil: (310) 795-2335
Office: (310) 452-5555
Fax: (310) 452-5550
Email: prosenfeld@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 1 of 10 June 2019
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling
Principal Environmental Chemist Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist
Education
Ph.D. Soil Chemistry, University of Washington, 1999. Dissertation on volatile organic compound filtration.
M.S. Environmental Science, U.C. Berkeley, 1995. Thesis on organic waste economics.
B.A. Environmental Studies, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1991. Thesis on wastewater treatment.
Professional Experience
Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years’ experience conducting environmental investigations and risk assessments for
evaluating impacts to human health, property, and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and
transport of environmental contaminants, human health risk, exposure assessment, and ecological restoration. Dr.
Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from unconventional oil drilling operations, oil spills, landfills,
boilers and incinerators, process stacks, storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, and many other industrial
and agricultural sources. His project experience ranges from monitoring and modeling of pollution sources to
evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at industrial facilities and residents in surrounding communities.
Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk assessments for contaminated sites
containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria, particulate matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents,
pesticides, radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs, PAHs, perchlorate,
asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS), unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates (MTBE), among
other pollutants. Dr. Rosenfeld also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from various projects and is
an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as the evaluation of odor nuisance
impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous emissions. As a principal scientist at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld
directs air dispersion modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert witness and testified about
pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at dozens of sites and has testified as an expert witness on
more than ten cases involving exposure to air contaminants from industrial sources.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 10 June 2019
Professional History:
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner
UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher)
UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor
UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator
UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate
Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist
National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor
Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager
Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager
Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 – 2000; Risk Assessor
King County, Seattle, 1996 – 1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist
Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist
Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist
Publications:
Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil
Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48
Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property
Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342
Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C.,
(2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated
Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632.
Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks of Hazardous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and
Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL.
Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113–125.
Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and
Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal
of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living
near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air
Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 10 June 2019
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid
Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two
Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255.
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins
And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527-
000530.
Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near
a Former Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197.
Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for
Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357.
Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater,
Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344.
Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food,
Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science
and Technology. 49(9),171-178.
Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor-Quality-Wheel Classification Scheme
For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation’s Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC)
2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities,
and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science
and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from
Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using
High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management
Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS–6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water
Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal
of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor
emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research. 73(4), 363-367.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and
Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor.
Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 10 June 2019
Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and
distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users
Network, 7(1).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids
Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters
thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third
World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California.
Presentations:
Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile
organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American
Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA.
Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.;
Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water.
Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse,
R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis,
Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS)
Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United
States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting, Lecture conducted
from Tuscon, AZ.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United
States” Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the
United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture
conducted from Tuscon, AZ.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in
populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air
Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and
Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing
Facility. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from
University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium-Contaminated Water Into A
Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23rd Annual International
Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst
MA.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 10 June 2019
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment
Facility Emissions. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted
from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3-
Trichloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting . Lecture
conducted from San Diego, CA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAH, and Metal Exposure in Florala,
Alabama. The AEHS Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 – 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on
Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants – DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia
Hotel in Oslo Norway.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. APHA 134 Annual Meeting &
Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
Mealey’s C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel,
Philadelphia, PA.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton
Hotel, Irvine California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA
Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey’s Groundwater
Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from
Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related
Perfluorochemicals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Law Conference.
Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water and
Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability
and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundwater Association. Environmental
Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust.
Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona.
Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River.
Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 10 June 2019
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners.
Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento,
California.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh
International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical
Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus
Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California
CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA
Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and
Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water
Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.
Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association . Lecture
conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 11-14, 2002). Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a
Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from
Indianapolis, Maryland.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Water
Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted
from Ocean Shores, California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery
Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil
Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from
Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldwell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from
Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 10 June 2019
Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three
Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim
California.
Teaching Experience:
UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science
100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on
the health effects of environmental contaminants.
National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Sante Fe, New
Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage
tanks.
National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1,
2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.
California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San
Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.
UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation
Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.
University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry,
Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.
U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.
Academic Grants Awarded:
California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.
Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.
Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.
Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.
King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of
Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on
VOC emissions. 1998.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of
polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.
James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered
Poplar trees with resistance to round-up. 1996.
United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the
Tahoe National Forest. 1995.
Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts
in West Indies. 1993
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 10 June 2019
Deposition and/or Trial Testimony:
In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey
Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant.
Case No.: 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition. 6-7-2019
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division
M/T Carla Maersk, Plaintiffs, vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS “Conti Perdido”
Defendant.
Case No.: 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237
Rosenfeld Deposition. 5-9-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
Carole-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC615636
Rosenfeld Deposition, 1-26-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC646857
Rosenfeld Deposition, 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19
In United States District Court For The District of Colorado
Bells et al. Plaintiff vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants
Case: No 1:16-cv-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition, 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018
In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 112th Judicial District
Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants
Cause No 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-17-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa
Simons et al., Plaintiffs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants
Cause No C12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-20-2017
In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois
Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-23-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles
Warrn Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC
Case No.: LC102019 (c/w BC582154)
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018
In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division
Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2017
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 10 June 2019
In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish
Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 13-2-03987-5
Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017
Trial, March 2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda
Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants
Case No.: RG14711115
Rosenfeld Deposition, September 2015
In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants
Case No.: LALA002187
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Jerry Dovico, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Valley View Sine LLC, et al., Defendants
Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Doug Pauls, et al.,, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Richard Warren, et al., Defendants
Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia
Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al.
Civil Action N0. 14-C-30000
Rosenfeld Deposition, June 2015
In The Third Judicial District County of Dona Ana, New Mexico
Betty Gonzalez, et al. Plaintiffs vs. Del Oro Dairy, Del Oro Real Estate LLC, Jerry Settles and Deward
DeRuyter, Defendants
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Muscatine County
Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant
Case No 4980
Rosenfeld Deposition: May 2015
In the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida
Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant.
Case Number CACE07030358 (26)
Rosenfeld Deposition: December 2014
In the United States District Court Western District of Oklahoma
Tommy McCarty, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Oklahoma City Landfill, LLC d/b/a Southeast Oklahoma City
Landfill, et al. Defendants.
Case No. 5:12-cv-01152-C
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2014
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 10 June 2019
In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.
Case Number cc-11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987)
Rosenfeld Deposition: October 2012
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division
Kyle Cannon, Eugene Donovan, Genaro Ramirez, Carol Sassler, and Harvey Walton, each Individually and
on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. BP Products North America, Inc., Defendant.
Case 3:10-cv-00622
Rosenfeld Deposition: February 2012
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2013
In the Circuit Court of Baltimore County Maryland
Philip E. Cvach, II et al., Plaintiffs vs. Two Farms, Inc. d/b/a Royal Farms, Defendants
Case Number: 03-C-12-012487 OT
Rosenfeld Deposition: September 2013
EXHIBIT C
1640 5th St.., Suite 204 Santa
Santa Monica, California 90401
Tel: (949) 887‐9013
Email: mhagemann@swape.com
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
CEQA Review
Education:
M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984.
B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 1982.
Professional Certifications:
California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:
Matt has 25 years of experience in environmental policy, assessment and remediation. He spent nine
years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science
Policy Advisor in the Western Regional Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from
perchlorate and MTBE. While with EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of
the assessment of seven major military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement
actions under provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) while also working
with permit holders to improve hydrogeologic characterization and water quality monitoring.
Matt has worked closely with U.S. EPA legal counsel and the technical staff of several states in the
application and enforcement of RCRA, Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act regulations. Matt
has trained the technical staff in the States of California, Hawaii, Nevada, Arizona and the Territory of
Guam in the conduct of investigations, groundwater fundamentals, and sampling techniques.
Positions Matt has held include:
•Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 – present);
•Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 – 2014;
•Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 ‐‐ 2003);
• Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001 – 2004);
• Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989–
1998);
• Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 – 2000);
• Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 –
1998);
• Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990 – 1995);
• Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986 – 1998); and
• Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984 – 1986).
Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:
With SWAPE, Matt’s responsibilities have included:
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 100 environmental impact reports
since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard to hazardous waste, water
resources, water quality, air quality, Valley Fever, greenhouse gas emissions, and geologic
hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead agencies at the
local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks and
implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from toxins
and Valley Fever.
• Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at industrial facilities.
• Manager of a project to provide technical assistance to a community adjacent to a former
Naval shipyard under a grant from the U.S. EPA.
• Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns.
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications
for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission.
• Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S.
• Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in
Southern California drinking water wells.
• Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the
review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas
stations throughout California.
• Expert witness on two cases involving MTBE litigation.
• Expert witness and litigation support on the impact of air toxins and hazards at a school.
• Expert witness in litigation at a former plywood plant.
With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt’s duties included the following:
• Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony
by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking
water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony
against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies.
• Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by
MTBE in California and New York.
2
• Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production‐related contamination in Mississippi.
• Lead author for a multi‐volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los
Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines.
3
• Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with
clients and regulators.
Executive Director:
As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange
County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of
wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange
County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection
of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the
development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the
discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including
Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business
institutions including the Orange County Business Council.
Hydrogeology:
As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to
characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point
Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army
Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
• Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of
monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and
groundwater.
• Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory
analysis at military bases.
• Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation
development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.
At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of
groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to
show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and
County of Maui.
As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the
Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included
the following:
• Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for
the protection of drinking water.
• Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities
through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports,
conducted public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very
concerned about the impact of designation.
4
• Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments,
including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water
transfer.
Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
• Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance
with Subtitle C requirements.
• Reviewed and wrote ʺpart Bʺ permits for the disposal of hazardous waste.
• Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed
the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.
EPA legal counsel.
• Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor’s investigations of waste sites.
With the National Park Service, Matt directed service‐wide investigations of contaminant sources to
prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
• Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the
Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants.
• Conducted watershed‐scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and
Olympic National Park.
• Identified high‐levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico
and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA.
• Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a
national workgroup.
• Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while
serving on a national workgroup.
• Co‐authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal
watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation‐
wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks.
• Contributed to the Federal Multi‐Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water
Action Plan.
Policy:
Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 9. Activities included the following:
• Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the
potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking
water supplies.
• Shaped EPA’s national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing
to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in
Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
• Improved the technical training of EPAʹs scientific and engineering staff.
• Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region’s 300 scientists and engineers in
negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific
principles into the policy‐making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents.
5
Geology:
With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for
timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
• Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical
models to determine slope stability.
• Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource
protection.
• Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the
city of Medford, Oregon.
As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later
listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern
Oregon. Duties included the following:
• Supervised year‐long effort for soil and groundwater sampling.
• Conducted aquifer tests.
• Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.
Teaching:
From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university
levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in
environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater
contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students.
• Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.
Matt taught physical geology (lecture and lab and introductory geology at Golden West College in
Huntington Beach, California from 2010 to 2014.
Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public
Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.
EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.
Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and
Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las
Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at
schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.
6
Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE
Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.
Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater
Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust,
Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy
of Sciences, Irvine, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water
Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter‐Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.
Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited
presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of
the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a
meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address
Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental
Journalists.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater
(and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage
Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and
State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished
report.
7
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.
Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks. Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential Water Quality Concerns Related
to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft
Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright
Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.
Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air
Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.
Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic
Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui,
October 1996.
Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu,
Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air
and Waste Management Association Publication VIP‐61.
Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Characterization and Cleanup a t Closing Military Bases
in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater
Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of
Groundwater.
Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL‐
contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
8
Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of
Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.
Other Experience:
Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examination, 2009‐
2011.
9
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
mhagemann@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
prosenfeld@swape.com
April 6, 2022
Mitchell M. Tsai
155 South El Molino, Suite 104
Pasadena, CA 91101
Subject: Comments on the Coral Mountain Resort Project (SCH No. 2021020310)
Dear Mr. Tsai,
We have reviewed the February 2022 Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”) and the June 2021
Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”) for the Coral Mountain Resort Project (“Project”) located in
the City of La Quinta (“City”). The Project proposes to construct a mixed-use development consisting of
600 residential dwelling units, 150 key-resort rooms, 57,000-square-feet (“SF”) of resort-serving
commercial and recreational space, a 16.62-acre artificial Wave Basin, 60,000-SF of commercial space,
and 23.6-acres of open space recreation, on the 120.8-acre site.
Our review concludes that the FEIR fails to adequately evaluate the Project’s air quality, health risk, and
greenhouse gas impacts. As a result, emissions and health risk impacts associated with construction and
operation of the proposed Project are underestimated and inadequately addressed. An updated EIR
should be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential health risk and greenhouse gas
impacts that the project may have on the surrounding environment.
Air Quality Failure to Include PDFs as Mitigation Measures
The DEIR concludes that the Project would have significant air quality impacts associated with Project
construction, operation, and special events. Specifically, the DEIR estimates that the Project’s Phase I
construction-related NOX emissions, Phase 3 operational VOC emissions, and special event VOC and NOX
emissions would exceed the applicable SCAQMD regional thresholds (p. 4.1-22, Table 4.2-5; p. 4.1-27,
Table 4.2-7; p. 4.1-30, Table 4.2-9). However, after the implementation of Project Design Features
(“PDFs”) and mitigation, the DEIR concludes that Project emissions would have less-than-significant
impacts (p. 4.1-23, Table 4.2-6; p. 4.1-29, Table 4.2-8; p. 4.1-31, Table 4.2-10).
2
The Project’s air quality analysis is inadequate, as the DEIR and FEIR should have incorporated all PDFs,
as described in the DEIR, as formal mitigation measures (p. 4.1-13 – 4.1-15). According to the
Association of Environmental Professionals (“AEP”) CEQA Portal Topic Paper on mitigation measures:
“While not “mitigation”, a good practice is to include those project design feature(s) that
address environmental impacts in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP).
Often the MMRP is all that accompanies building and construction plans through the permit
process. If the design features are not listed as important to addressing an environmental
impact, it is easy for someone not involved in the original environmental process to approve a
change to the project that could eliminate one or more of the design features without
understanding the resulting environmental impact.”1
As you can see in the excerpt above, PDFs that are not formally included as mitigation measures may be
eliminated from the Project’s design altogether. Thus, as the PDFs described in the DEIR are not formally
included as mitigation measures, we cannot guarantee that they would be implemented, monitored,
and enforced on the Project site. As a result, until the PDFs are included as mitigation measures, the
DEIR’s air quality analysis should not be relied upon to determine Project significance. Failure to Identify a Potentially Significant Air Quality Impact
The DEIR indicates that Project “[b]uildout [is] anticipated to occur in three primary phases over
approximately 4- to 6-years” (p. 82). Thus, by 2026, all three phases of construction would be
operational together. As such, the DEIR should have summed the Project’s operational emissions for
Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3 in order to estimate the Project’s total operational air quality impact.
In order to correctly evaluate the Project’s air quality impact, we summed the DEIR’s operational air
quality emissions from all three phases of Project buildout. We found that the Project’s operational VOC
and NOX emissions exceed the applicable SCAQMD threshold of 55 pounds per day (“lbs/day”) (see table
below).2
1 “CEQA Portal Topic Paper Mitigation Measures.” AEP, February 2020, available at:
https://ceqaportal.org/tp/CEQA%20Mitigation%202020.pdf, p. 6.
2 “South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds.” SCAQMD, April 2019, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf.
4
Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments in February 2015.4
Furthermore, the State of California Department of Justice recommends warehouse projects prepare a
quantitative HRA pursuant to OEHHA and local air district guidelines.5 The OEHHA guidance document
describes the types of projects that warrant the preparation of an HRA. Specifically, OEHHA
recommends that all short-term projects lasting at least two months be evaluated for cancer risks to
nearby sensitive receptors. As the Project’s construction duration exceeds the 2-month requirement set
forth by OEHHA, it is clear that the Project meets the threshold warranting a quantified HRA under
OEHHA guidance. Furthermore, the OEHHA document recommends that exposure from projects lasting
more than 6 months be evaluated for the duration of the project and recommends that an exposure
duration of 30 years be used to estimate individual cancer risk for the maximally exposed individual
resident (“MEIR”). Even though we were not provided with the expected lifetime of the Project, we can
reasonably assume that the Project will operate for at least 30 years, if not more. Therefore, we
recommend that health risk impacts from Project operation also be evaluated, as a 30-year exposure
duration vastly exceeds the 6-month requirement set forth by OEHHA. These recommendations reflect
the most recent state health risk policies, and as such, we recommend that an updated EIR require the
analysis of health risk impacts posed to nearby sensitive receptors from Project-generated DPM
emissions for future individual projects.
Third, by claiming a less than significant impact without conducting a quantified construction or
operational HRA for nearby, existing sensitive receptors, the DEIR fails to compare the excess health risk
impact to the SCAQMD’s specific numeric threshold of 10 in one million.6 Thus, in accordance with the
most relevant guidance, we recommend that the DEIR and FEIR require the Specific Plan to require
future individual projects to conduct an assessment of the health risk posed to nearby, existing
receptors from construction and operation.
Greenhouse Gas Failure to Implement All Feasible Mitigation to Reduce Emissions
The DEIR concludes that the Project would result in a significant-and-unavoidable greenhouse gas
(“GHG”) impact after the implementation of mitigation measure (“MM”) GHG-1 (p. 4.7-20). Specifically,
the DEIR states:
“The annual GHG emissions associated with the operation of the proposed Project, is shown on
Table 4.7- 8, after implementation of all feasible emission reduction measures as enforceable
PDFs and MM GHG- 1. As shown, Project-related GHG emissions are reduced to 3.62 MTCO2e
per SP per year which is less than the applicable threshold of 3.65 MTCO2e per SP per year.
While implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, would offset the GHG emissions generated
4 “Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February
2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf.
5 “Warehouse Projects: Best Practices and Mitigation Measures to Comply with the California Environmental
Quality Act.” State of California Department of Justice, available at:
https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/environment/warehouse-best-practices.pdf, p. 6.
6 “South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds.” SCAQMD, April 2019, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf.
5
by the project that are in excess of the applicable threshold, by reducing GHG emissions
elsewhere through the purchase of carbon credits, it would not change the actual GHG
emissions levels of the project itself. Moreover, as the use of carbon credits as mitigation for
GHG emissions has not been widely adopted in the Coachella Valley area for residential and
resort community projects, this analysis conservatively considers impacts associated with GHG
emissions generated by the proposed project to be significant and unavoidable because the City
cannot determine with certainty that the project’s GHG emissions will be reduced to a less than
significant level” (p. 4.7-20).
However, while we agree that the Project would result in a significant GHG impact, the DEIR’s conclusion
that this impact is significant-and-unavoidable is incorrect. According to CEQA Guidelines § 15096(g)(2):
“When an EIR has been prepared for a project, the Responsible Agency shall not approve the
project as proposed if the agency finds any feasible alternative or feasible mitigation measures
within its powers that would substantially lessen or avoid any significant effect the project
would have on the environment.”
As you can see, an impact can only be labeled as significant-and-unavoidable after all available, feasible
mitigation is considered. Here, while the DEIR implements MM GHG-1, which requires the Project
Applicant to purchase carbon offsets, the DEIR fails to implement all feasible mitigation (p. 4.7-26).
Therefore, the DEIR’s conclusion that Project’s GHG emissions would be significant-and-unavoidable is
unsubstantiated. To reduce the Project’s GHG impacts to the maximum extent possible, additional
feasible mitigation measures should be incorporated, such as those suggested in the following section of
this letter titled “Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce Emissions.” Thus, the Project should
not be approved until an updated EIR is prepared, including updated, accurate air modeling, as well as
incorporating all feasible mitigation to reduce emissions to less-than-significant levels. Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce Emissions
Our analysis demonstrates that the Project would result in potentially significant air quality and GHG
impacts that should be mitigated further. As such, in an effort to reduce the Project’s emissions, we
identified several mitigation measures that are applicable to the proposed Project. Therefore, to reduce
the Project’s emissions, we recommend consideration of SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS PEIR’s Air Quality Project
Level Mitigation Measures (“PMM-AQ-1”) and Greenhouse Gas Project Level Mitigation Measures
(“PMM-GHG-1”), as described below: 7
7 “4.0 Mitigation Measures.” Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report Addendum #1, September
2020, available at: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/fpeir connectsocal addendum 4 mitigationmeasures.pdf?1606004420, p. 4.0-2 – 4.0-10; 4.0-19 –
4.0-23; See also: “Certified Final Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report.” Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG), May 2020, available at: https://scag.ca.gov/peir.
7
u) Projects should work with local cities and counties to install adequate signage that prohibits truck idling in
certain locations (e.g., near schools and sensitive receptors).
y) Projects that will introduce sensitive receptors within 500 feet of freeways and other sources should consider
installing high efficiency of enhanced filtration units, such as Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) 13 or
better. Installation of enhanced filtration units can be verified during occupancy inspection prior to the issuance
of an occupancy permit.
z) Develop an ongoing monitoring, inspection, and maintenance program for the MERV filters.
aa) Consult the SCAG Environmental Justice Toolbox for potential measures to address impacts to low-income
and/or minority communities.
bb) The following criteria related to diesel emissions shall be implemented on by individual project sponsors as
appropriate and feasible:
- Diesel nonroad vehicles on site for more than 10 total days shall have either (1) engines that meet EPA
on road emissions standards or (2) emission control technology verified by EPA or CARB to reduce PM
emissions by a minimum of 85%
- Diesel generators on site for more than 10 total days shall be equipped with emission control
technology verified by EPA or CARB to reduce PM emissions by a minimum of 85%.
- Nonroad diesel engines on site shall be Tier 2 or higher.
- Diesel nonroad construction equipment on site for more than 10 total days shall have either (1) engines
meeting EPA Tier 4 nonroad emissions standards or (2) emission control technology verified by EPA or
CARB for use with nonroad engines to reduce PM emissions by a minimum of 85% for engines for 50 hp
and greater and by a minimum of 20% for engines less than 50 hp.
- Emission control technology shall be operated, maintained, and serviced as recommended by the
emission control technology manufacturer.
- Diesel vehicles, construction equipment, and generators on site shall be fueled with ultra-low sulfur
diesel fuel (ULSD) or a biodiesel blend approved by the original engine manufacturer with sulfur
content of 15 ppm or less.
- The construction contractor shall maintain a list of all diesel vehicles, construction equipment, and
generators to be used on site. The list shall include the following:
i. Contractor and subcontractor name and address, plus contact person responsible for the
vehicles or equipment.
ii. Equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment serial number, engine manufacturer,
engine model year, engine certification (Tier rating), horsepower, engine serial number, and
expected fuel usage and hours of operation.
iii. For the emission control technology installed: technology type, serial number, make, model,
manufacturer, EPA/CARB verification number/level, and installation date and hour-meter
reading on installation date.
- The contractor shall establish generator sites and truck-staging zones for vehicles waiting to load or
unload material on site. Such zones shall be located where diesel emissions have the least impact on
abutters, the general public, and especially sensitive receptors such as hospitals, schools, daycare
facilities, elderly housing, and convalescent facilities.
- The contractor shall maintain a monthly report that, for each on road diesel vehicle, nonroad
construction equipment, or generator onsite, includes:
i. Hour-meter readings on arrival on-site, the first and last day of every month, and on off-site
date.
ii. Any problems with the equipment or emission controls.
iii. Certified copies of fuel deliveries for the time period that identify:
1. Source of supply
2. Quantity of fuel
3. Quantity of fuel, including sulfur content (percent by weight) cc) Project should exceed Title-24 Building Envelope Energy Efficiency Standards (California Building Standards
Code). The following measures can be used to increase energy efficiency:
- Provide pedestrian network improvements, such as interconnected street network, narrower roadways
9
ix. Use lighter-colored pavement where feasible;
x. Recycle construction debris to maximum extent feasible;
xi. Plant shade trees in or near construction projects where feasible; and
xii. Solicit bids that include concepts listed above.
e) Measures that encourage transit use, carpooling, bike-share and car-share programs, active transportation,
and parking strategies, including, but not limited to the following:
i. Promote transit-active transportation coordinated strategies;
ii. Increase bicycle carrying capacity on transit and rail vehicles;
iii. Improve or increase access to transit;
iv. Increase access to common goods and services, such as groceries, schools, and day care;
v. Incorporate affordable housing into the project;
vi. Incorporate the neighborhood electric vehicle network;
vii. Orient the project toward transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities;
viii. Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service;
ix. Provide traffic calming measures;
x. Provide bicycle parking;
xi. Limit or eliminate park supply;
xii. Unbundle parking costs;
xiii. Provide parking cash-out programs;
xiv. Implement or provide access to commute reduction program;
f) Incorporate bicycle and pedestrian facilities into project designs, maintaining these facilities, and providing
amenities incentivizing their use; and planning for and building local bicycle projects that connect with the
regional network;
g) Improving transit access to rail and bus routes by incentives for construction and transit facilities within
developments, and/or providing dedicated shuttle service to transit stations; and
h) Adopting employer trip reduction measures to reduce employee trips such as vanpool and carpool programs,
providing end-of-trip facilities, and telecommuting programs including but not limited to measures that:
i. Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, and ride-sharing programs;
ii. Provide transit passes;
iii. Shift single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling or vanpooling, for example providing ride-
matching services;
iv. Provide incentives or subsidies that increase that use of modes other than single-occupancy
vehicle;
v. Provide on-site amenities at places of work, such as priority parking for carpools and vanpools,
secure bike parking, and showers and locker rooms;
vi. Provide employee transportation coordinators at employment sites;
vii. Provide a guaranteed ride home service to users of non-auto modes.
i) Designate a percentage of parking spaces for ride-sharing vehicles or high-occupancy vehicles, and provide
adequate passenger loading and unloading for those vehicles;
j) Land use siting and design measures that reduce GHG emissions, including:
i. Developing on infill and brownfields sites;
ii. Building compact and mixed-use developments near transit;
iii. Retaining on-site mature trees and vegetation, and planting new canopy trees;
10
iv. Measures that increase vehicle efficiency, encourage use of zero and low emissions vehicles,
or reduce the carbon content of fuels, including constructing or encouraging construction of
electric vehicle charging stations or neighborhood electric vehicle networks, or charging for
electric bicycles; and
v. Measures to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste management through encouraging solid
waste recycling and reuse.
k) Consult the SCAG Environmental Justice Toolbox for potential measures to address impacts to low-income
and/or minority communities. The measures provided above are also intended to be applied in low income and
minority communities as applicable and feasible.
l) Require at least five percent of all vehicle parking spaces include electric vehicle charging stations, or at a
minimum, require the appropriate infrastructure to facilitate sufficient electric charging for passenger vehicles
and trucks to plug-in.
m) Encourage telecommuting and alternative work schedules, such as:
i. Staggered starting times
ii. Flexible schedules
iii. Compressed work weeks
n) Implement commute trip reduction marketing, such as:
i. New employee orientation of trip reduction and alternative mode options
ii. Event promotions
iii. Publications
o) Implement preferential parking permit program
p) Implement school pool and bus programs
q) Price workplace parking, such as:
i. Explicitly charging for parking for its employees;
ii. Implementing above market rate pricing;
iii. Validating parking only for invited guests;
iv. Not providing employee parking and transportation allowances; and
v. Educating employees about available alternatives.
These measures offer a cost-effective, feasible way to incorporate lower-emitting design features into
the proposed Project, which subsequently, reduce emissions released during Project construction and
operation. An updated EIR should be prepared to include all feasible mitigation measures, as well as
include updated air quality and GHG analyses to ensure that the necessary mitigation measures are
implemented to reduce emissions to below thresholds. The updated EIR should also demonstrate a
commitment to the implementation of these measures prior to Project approval, to ensure that the
Project’s significant emissions are reduced to the maximum extent possible. Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery regarding this project. Additional information may become
available in the future; thus, we retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional
information becomes available. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of
care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants
practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is
made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and protocols, site conditions, analytical testing
results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which were limited to information that was
11
reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain informational gaps, inconsistencies, or
otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of information obtained or provided by
third parties.
Sincerely,
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
Attachment A: Matt Hagemann CV
Attachment B: Paul E. Rosenfeld CV
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
mhagemann@swape.com
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
CEQA Review
Education:
M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984.
B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 1982.
Professional Certifications:
California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:
Matt has 30 years of experience in environmental policy, contaminant assessment and remediation,
stormwater compliance, and CEQA review. He spent nine years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and
Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science Policy Advisor in the Western Regional
Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from perchlorate and MTBE. While with
EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of the assessment of seven major
military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement actions under provisions of
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and directed efforts to improve hydrogeologic
characterization and water quality monitoring. For the past 15 years, as a founding partner with SWAPE,
Matt has developed extensive client relationships and has managed complex projects that include
consultation as an expert witness and a regulatory specialist, and a manager of projects ranging from
industrial stormwater compliance to CEQA review of impacts from hazardous waste, air quality and
greenhouse gas emissions.
Positions Matt has held include:
•Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 – present);
•Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 – 2104, 2017;
•Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 ‐‐ 2003);
Attachment A
2
• Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001 – 2004);
• Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989–
1998);
• Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 – 2000);
• Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 –
1998);
• Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990 – 1995);
• Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986 – 1998); and
• Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984 – 1986).
Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:
With SWAPE, Matt’s responsibilities have included:
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 300 environmental impact reports
and negative declarations since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard
to hazardous waste, water resources, water quality, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions,
and geologic hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead
agencies at the local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks
and implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from
toxins and Valley Fever.
• Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at more than 100 industrial
facilities.
• Expert witness on numerous cases including, for example, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)
contamination of groundwater, MTBE litigation, air toxins at hazards at a school, CERCLA
compliance in assessment and remediation, and industrial stormwater contamination.
• Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns.
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications
for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission.
• Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S.
• Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in
Southern California drinking water wells.
• Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the
review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas
stations throughout California.
With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt’s duties included the following:
• Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony
by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking
water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony
against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies.
• Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by
MTBE in California and New York.
3
• Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production‐related contamination in Mississippi.
• Lead author for a multi‐volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los
Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines.
• Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with
clients and regulators.
Executive Director:
As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange
County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of
wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange
County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection
of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the
development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the
discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including
Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business
institutions including the Orange County Business Council.
Hydrogeology:
As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to
characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point
Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army
Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
• Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of
monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and
groundwater.
• Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory
analysis at military bases.
• Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation
development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.
At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of
groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to
show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and
County of Maui.
As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the
Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included
the following:
• Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for
the protection of drinking water.
• Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities
through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports, conducted
4
public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very concerned
about the impact of designation.
• Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments,
including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water
transfer.
Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
• Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance
with Subtitle C requirements.
• Reviewed and wrote ʺpart Bʺ permits for the disposal of hazardous waste.
• Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed
the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.
EPA legal counsel.
• Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor’s investigations of waste sites.
With the National Park Service, Matt directed service‐wide investigations of contaminant sources to
prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
• Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the
Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants.
• Conducted watershed‐scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and
Olympic National Park.
• Identified high‐levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico
and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA.
• Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a
national workgroup.
• Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while
serving on a national workgroup.
• Co‐authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal
watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation‐
wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks.
• Contributed to the Federal Multi‐Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water
Action Plan.
Policy:
Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 9.
Activities included the following:
• Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the
potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking
water supplies.
• Shaped EPA’s national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing
to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in
Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
• Improved the technical training of EPAʹs scientific and engineering staff.
• Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region’s 300 scientists and engineers in
negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific
5
principles into the policy‐making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents.
Geology:
With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for
timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
• Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical
models to determine slope stability.
• Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource
protection.
• Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the
city of Medford, Oregon.
As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later
listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern
Oregon. Duties included the following:
• Supervised year‐long effort for soil and groundwater sampling.
• Conducted aquifer tests.
• Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.
Teaching:
From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university
levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in
environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater
contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students.
• Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.
Matt is currently a part time geology instructor at Golden West College in Huntington Beach, California
where he taught from 2010 to 2014 and in 2017.
Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public
Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.
EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.
Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and
Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las
Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).
6
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at
schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.
Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE
Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.
Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater
Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust,
Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy
of Sciences, Irvine, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water
Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter‐Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.
Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited
presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of
the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a
meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address
Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental
Journalists.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater
(and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage
Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and
State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.
7
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished
report.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.
Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks. Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential W a t e r Quality Concerns Related
to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft
Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright
Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.
Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air
Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.
Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic
Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui,
October 1996.
Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu,
Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air
and Waste Management Association Publication VIP‐61.
Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Ch ar ac te r i z a t i o n and Cl ean up a t Closing Military Bases
in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater
Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of
Groundwater.
Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL‐
contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
8
Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of
Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.
Other Experience:
Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examinations,
2009‐2011.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 10 October 2021
Professional History:
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner
UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher)
UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor
UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator
UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate
Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist
National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor
Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager
Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager
Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 – 2000; Risk Assessor
King County, Seattle, 1996 – 1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist
Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist
Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist
Publications:
Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil
Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48
Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property
Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342
Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C.,
(2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated
Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632.
Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks of Hazardous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and
Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL.
Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113–125.
Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and
Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal
of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living
near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air
Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 10 October 2021
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid
Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two
Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255.
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins
And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527-
000530.
Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near
a Former Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197.
Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for
Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357.
Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater,
Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344.
Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food,
Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science
and Technology. 49(9),171-178.
Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor-Quality-Wheel Classification Scheme
For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation’s Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC)
2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities,
and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science
and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from
Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using
High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management
Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS–6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water
Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal
of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor
emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research. 73(4), 363-367.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and
Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor.
Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 10 October 2021
Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and
distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users
Network, 7(1).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids
Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters
thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third
World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California.
Presentations:
Rosenfeld, P.E., "The science for Perfluorinated Chemicals (PFAS): What makes remediation so hard?" Law
Seminars International, (May 9-10, 2018) 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 101 Seattle, WA.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile
organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American
Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA.
Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.;
Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water.
Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse,
R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis,
Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS)
Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United
States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting , Lecture conducted
from Tuscon, AZ.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United
States” Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the
United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture
conducted from Tuscon, AZ.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in
populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air
Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and
Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing
Facility. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from
University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium-Contaminated Water Into A
Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23rd Annual International
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 10 October 2021
Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst
MA.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment
Facility Emissions. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted
from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3-
Trichloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting. Lecture
conducted from San Diego, CA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAH, and Metal Exposure in Florala,
Alabama. The AEHS Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 – 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on
Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants – DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia
Hotel in Oslo Norway.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility . APHA 134 Annual Meeting &
Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
Mealey’s C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel,
Philadelphia, PA.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton
Hotel, Irvine California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA
Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey’s Groundwater
Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from
Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related
Perfluorochemicals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Law Conference.
Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water and
Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability
and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundwater Association. Environmental
Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust.
Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 10 October 2021
Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River.
Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners.
Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento,
California.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh
International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical
Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus
Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California
CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA
Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and
Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water
Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.
Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association . Lecture
conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 11-14, 2002). Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a
Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from
Indianapolis, Maryland.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Water
Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted
from Ocean Shores, California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery
Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil
Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from
Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldwell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 10 October 2021
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from
Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three
Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim
California.
Teaching Experience:
UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science
100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on
the health effects of environmental contaminants.
National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Sante Fe, New
Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage
tanks.
National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1,
2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.
California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San
Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.
UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation
Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.
University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry,
Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.
U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.
Academic Grants Awarded:
California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.
Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.
Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.
Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.
King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of
Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on
VOC emissions. 1998.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of
polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.
James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered
Poplar trees with resistance to round-up. 1996.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 10 October 2021
United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the
Tahoe National Forest. 1995.
Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts
in West Indies. 1993
Deposition and/or Trial Testimony:
In the Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois
Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 5-14-2021
Trial, October 8-4-2021
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Joseph Rafferty, Plaintiff vs. Consolidated Rail Corporation and National Railroad Passenger Corporation
d/b/a AMTRAK,
Case No.: No. 18-L-6845
Rosenfeld Deposition, 6-28-2021
In the United States District Court For the Northern District of Illinois
Theresa Romcoe, Plaintiff vs. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation d/b/a METRA
Rail, Defendants
Case No.: No. 17-cv-8517
Rosenfeld Deposition, 5-25-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of Arizona In and For the Cunty of Maricopa
Mary Tryon et al., Plaintiff vs. The City of Pheonix v. Cox Cactus Farm, L.L.C., Utah Shelter Systems, Inc.
Case Number CV20127-094749
Rosenfeld Deposition: 5-7-2021
In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Beaumont Division
Robinson, Jeremy et al Plaintiffs, vs. CNA Insurance Company et al.
Case Number 1:17-cv-000508
Rosenfeld Deposition: 3-25-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino
Gary Garner, Personal Representative for the Estate of Melvin Garner vs. BNSF Railway Company.
Case No. 1720288
Rosenfeld Deposition 2-23-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, Spring Street Courthouse
Benny M Rodriguez vs. Union Pacific Railroad, A Corporation, et al.
Case No. 18STCV01162
Rosenfeld Deposition 12-23-2020
In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri
Karen Cornwell, Plaintiff, vs. Marathon Petroleum, LP, Defendant.
Case No.: 1716-CV10006
Rosenfeld Deposition. 8-30-2019
In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey
Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant.
Case No.: 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition. 6-7-2019
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 10 October 2021
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division
M/T Carla Maersk, Plaintiffs, vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS “Conti Perdido”
Defendant.
Case No.: 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237
Rosenfeld Deposition. 5-9-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
Carole-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC615636
Rosenfeld Deposition, 1-26-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC646857
Rosenfeld Deposition, 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19
In United States District Court For The District of Colorado
Bells et al. Plaintiff vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants
Case No.: 1:16-cv-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition, 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018
In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 112th Judicial District
Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants
Cause No.: 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-17-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa
Simons et al., Plaintiffs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants
Cause No C12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-20-2017
In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois
Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-23-2017
In United States District Court For The Southern District of Mississippi
Guy Manuel vs. The BP Exploration et al., Defendants
Case: No 1:19-cv-00315-RHW
Rosenfeld Deposition, 4-22-2020
In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles
Warrn Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC
Case No.: LC102019 (c/w BC582154)
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018
In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division
Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2017
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 10 October 2021
In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish
Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 13-2-03987-5
Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017
Trial, March 2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda
Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants
Case No.: RG14711115
Rosenfeld Deposition, September 2015
In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants
Case No.: LALA002187
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia
Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al.
Civil Action N0. 14-C-30000
Rosenfeld Deposition, June 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Muscatine County
Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant
Case No 4980
Rosenfeld Deposition: May 2015
In the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida
Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant.
Case Number CACE07030358 (26)
Rosenfeld Deposition: December 2014
In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.
Case Number cc-11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987)
Rosenfeld Deposition: October 2012
In the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Northern Division
James K. Benefield, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. International Paper Company, Defendant.
Civil Action Number 2:09-cv-232-WHA-TFM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2010, June 2011
In the Circuit Court of Jefferson County Alabama
Jaeanette Moss Anthony, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Drummond Company Inc., et al., Defendants
Civil Action No. CV 2008-2076
Rosenfeld Deposition: September 2010
In the United States District Court, Western District Lafayette Division
Ackle et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Citgo Petroleum Corporation, et al., Defendants.
Case Number 2:07CV1052
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2009