2021-June Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR - Appendix O - Alternatives Water, Energy Comparison
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
DRAFT EIR
SCH# 2021020310
TECHNICAL APPENDICES
Water, Electric & Natural Gas
Consumption
& Air Quality and GHG Comparison
Appendix O
June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
Appendix – O
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR ‐ Appendix O‐1 June 2021
Appendix O
Alternatives Water Use
Proposed Project:
Summary AFY
Residential Indoor Demand 97.22
Non‐Residential Indoor Demand 59.94
Outdoor Demand 801.47
Total Project Demand 958.63
AFY/ac: 2.49286
Alternative 1: No Project/No Build
Alternative 1 would not result in water use. Therefore, no impacts.
APPENDIX – O
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR ‐ Appendix O‐2 June 2021
Alternative 2: No Project/Existing Entitlements
Alternative 3: Reduced Density
Alternative 4: Golf/Resort Hotel
APPENDIX – O
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR ‐ Appendix O‐3 June 2021
Alternative 5: Lake Amenity/Not Hotel
Coachella Valley Water District Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA)
CVWD established a Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) for areas within their service
boundary. For design purposes, the MAWA is the upper limit of annual applied water for the
established landscape area. It is based upon the areas reference evapotranspiration (ET)
adjustment factor, and the size of the landscaped area. The estimated applied water use shall
not exceed the MAWA.
APPENDIX – O
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR ‐ Appendix O‐4 June 2021
Electric and Natural Gas Alternative Comparison
Proposed Project Electricity and Natural Gas Use
Source Units Project Buildout
Energy Consumption
Electricity Total kWh/yr 8,642,729
Natural Gas Total kBTU/yr 21,855,400
Alternative 1 – No Project/No Build
Alternative 1 would not result in the development of the project site. The site would remain vacant and
undisturbed; therefore, energy consumption via electricity and natural gas would not occur onsite.
Source Units Alternative 1
Energy Consumption
Electricity Total kWh/yr 0
Natural Gas Total kBTU/yr 0
Alternative 2 – No Project/Existing Entitlements
Alternative 2 would develop 750 low density residential units on approximately 204.2 acres,
approximately 8.4 acres of General Commercial in the northeast corner of the site, and a golf course on
approximately 171.9 acres of the site. Table below indicates the electricity and natural gas use of the
proposed uses, using CalEEMod default rates for uses located in Climate Zone 15. Per CalEEMod, golf
use would not result in electricity and natural gas use. However, it could be argued that activities
associated with golf course operations (i.e., golf cart charging, maintenance, etc.) may result in the use
of electricity.
Alternative 2 would result in approximately 40 percent less electricity and natural gas consumption
compared to the proposed project.
Land Use Electricity
KWhr
Natural Gas
KBTU
750 Residential
(Low Density) 4,614,495* 13,182,066.5
60,000 sf
Commercial 456,511 98,400
Golf 0 0
Total 5,071,006 13,280,466.5
*This number was determined by using the project’s kWh value,
dividing it by 496 (the project’s proposed low density residential
number) to receive the amount of electricity per residential unit
(6,152.66 kWhr). Then 6,152.66 kWhr was multiplied by 750 to
APPENDIX – O
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR ‐ Appendix O‐5 June 2021
determine how much electricity 750 dwelling units would consume.
The same was completed for natural gas.
Source Units Alternative 2
Energy Consumption
Proposed Project
Energy Consumption
Percent
Difference
Electricity Total kWh/yr 5,071,006 8,642,729 41% less
Natural Gas Total kBTU/yr 13,280,466.5 21,855,400
40% less
Alternative 3 – Reduced Density
Alternative 3 would develop the proposed project reduced by one‐third. The Reduced Density
Alternative would result in the development of 400 low density residential dwelling units, 100
resort/hotel rooms, 38,000 square feet of resort commercial uses, and 40,000 square feet of
neighborhood commercial uses. The Wave Basin would operate similarly to the proposed project. The
low density residential, resort residential, hotel and resort commercial, and regional shopping center
uses, provided in CalEEMod, were reduced by one‐third to determine the energy consumed by these
uses. The electricity use from the Wave Basin remains the same as the proposed project. Both the
proposed project and Alternative 3 would include special events throughout the year.
Alternative 3 would consume 6,223,867.4 kWhr of electricity and 14,424,564 kBTU of natural gas per
year. This is approximately 28 percent and 34 percent less electricity and natural gas consumed,
respectively, compared to the project.
Land Use Electricity
KWh/yr
Natural Gas
kBTU/yr
330 Residential (Low Density) 2,014,135.2 5,753,708.4
70 Resort Residential 227,830.7 721,815.6
100 Hotel Rooms and 38,000 sf
Resort Commercial 2,152,174.2 7,884,096
40,000 sf Regional Shopping
Center 301,297.3 64,944
User Defined Recreational 1,528,430 0
Total 6,223,867.4 14,424,564
Source Units Alternative 3
Energy Consumption
Project Buildout
Energy Consumption
Percent
Difference
Electricity Total kWh/yr 6,223,867.4 8,642,729 28% less
Natural Gas Total kBTU/yr 14,424,564 21,855,400 34% less
APPENDIX – O
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR ‐ Appendix O‐6 June 2021
Alternative 4 – Golf/Resort Hotel
Alternative 4 would develop a resort hotel of 150 hotel rooms and associated recreational, restaurant
and retail amenities, an 18‐hole championship golf course that would be open to the public to play on a
daily fee basis, and 600 low‐density residential units. The Wave Basin is removed from this Alternative;
therefore, neither the mechanical equipment required to operate the Wave, nor the four special events
associated with the Wave Basin would occur. As previously stated, the table below indicates the
electricity and natural gas use of the proposed uses, using CalEEMod default rates for uses located in
Climate Zone 15. Per CalEEMod, golf use would not result in electricity and natural gas use. However, it
could be argued that activities associated with golf course operations (i.e., golf cart charging,
maintenance, etc.) may result in the use of electricity.
he operation of Alternative 4 would result in a reduced energy demand, via electricity due to the
removal of the Wave Basin and neighborhood commercial. However, Alternative 4 would result in an
increase of natural gas consumption due to the increase of low density residential homes. Alternative 4
would consume 6,952,590 kWhr of electricity and 22,491,253.2 kBTU of natural gas per year. This is an
approximately 19.5 percent decrease and 3 percent increase in electricity and natural gas consumption,
respectively, compared to the project.
Land Use Electricity
kWhr
Natural Gas
kBTU
600 Residential
(Low Density) 3,691,596.8* 10,545,653.2
150 Room Hotel/
57,000 sf Resort
Commercial
3,260,870 11,945,600
Golf course 0 0
Total 6,952,466.8 22,491,253.2
*This number was determined by using the project’s kWh value,
dividing it by 496 (the project’s proposed low density residential
number) to receive the amount of electricity per residential unit
(6,152.66 kWhr). Then 6,152.66 kWhr was multiplied by 600 to
determine how much electricity 600 dwelling units would consume.
The same was completed for natural gas.
Source Units Alternative 4
Energy Consumption
Project Buildout
Energy Consumption
Percent
Difference
Electricity Total kWh/yr 6,952,466.8 8,642,729 19.5% less
Natural Gas Total kBTU/yr 22,491,253.2 21,855,400
3% increase
Alternative 5 – Lake Amenity/No Hotel
Alternative 5 would develop a lake amenity (instead of the Wave Basin), 750 low‐density residential
units, and 8.4 acres of commercial uses at the northeast corner of the property. The Wave Basin is
removed from this Alternative; therefore, neither the mechanical equipment required to operate the
APPENDIX – O
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR ‐ Appendix O‐7 June 2021
Wave, nor the four special events associated with the Wave Basin would occur. As previously stated, the
table below indicates the electricity and natural gas use of the proposed uses, using CalEEMod default
rates for uses located in Climate Zone 15. Per CalEEMod, the recreational lake would not result in the
consumption of electricity or natural gas during operation.
Land Use Electricity
kWhr
Natural Gas
kBTU
750 Residential
(Low Density) 4,614,495* 13,182,066.5
60,000 sf
Commercial 456,511 98,400
Lake 0 0
Total 5,071,006 13,280,466.5
*This number was determined by using the project’s kWh value,
dividing it by 496 (the project’s proposed low density residential
number) to receive the amount of electricity per residential unit
(6,152.66 kWhr). Then that number was multiplied by 750 to
determine how much electricity 750 dwelling units would consume.
The same was done for natural gas.
Source Units Alternative 5
Energy Consumption
Project Buildout
Energy Consumption
Percent
Difference
Electricity Total kWh/yr 5,071,006 8,642,729 41% less
Natural Gas Total kBTU/yr 13,280,466.5 21,855,400
40% less